Hello everyone, apologies in advance for the long post.
I’m new here and hoping this is the right place to share some honest questions that have been going through my mind. I grew up in a Catholic family and environment in the Middle East — regular Mass, catechism, First Communion, the whole path with the equivalent of Christian scouts — but when I moved to Europe at 18 for studies and life, church slowly faded away. Over the years, the intellectual doubts grew stronger: It feels like I never questioned faith or decided upon it, it was just how I grew up and the sense of belonging and community was just my life and looking back at it, I see it positively. But now that I am towards my 40’s, things like the virgin birth, miracles (e.g. parting the Red Sea), and supernatural things from the bible doesn’t land well. I guess previously I never questioned that as the community was what was leading this and kept me in, but now that I am older I find it difficult to process. Also, I find the role of priests and some things being said at Mass hard to reconcile with my current mindset and beliefs and find some of the texts just too directive and leave no room for questions. Europe’s largely secular environment didn’t help, and I drifted to occasional Masses, then basically nothing for about 10-15 years now.
However, recently, I noticed that spiritually I still feel a pull — a sense that there’s something more, a resonance with Christian ideas about love, meaning, peace and surrender. I look at the US current situation and the churches feel like they are thriving and the people with them too. Especially with families with kids, men struggling, women etc… It really feels like an inclusive community that I feel Europe (or at least where I live) doesn;t have. Maybe they did beofre, maybe not. I feel like kids also here suffer from the absence of this, we just send them to school because we have to, and because the parents need to work, and in summer we put them in random summer camps. While as a kid, I loved summers and spending time with my church buddies and did all sorts of fun stuff. I discussed this briefly with a close friend (same background, grew up same town, now in the US) went through almost exactly the same phase but rediscovered a deep, mature faith a few years ago. He’s very devoted now, and talking to him has me puzzled and curious. We haven’t had that conversation yet, but it’s due to happen soon.
I’m not looking for quick answers or arguments — just wondering if anyone here has walked a similar path: raised Christian → drifted far due to science/doubt → felt a quiet pull back, and how you navigated it. Did you find ways to hold both intellectual honesty and spiritual openness? Any resources or perspectives (Catholic-friendly or otherwise) that helped?
Grateful for any gracious thoughts or shared stories.
Welcome to the forum, Tony. What a good topic, as I am sure many here have similar feelings. While I never left organized religion for more than a year or two in college, I can certainly relate to your observations. In my case, I deal with the real cognitive dissonance that Christianity has by accepting that it is indeed a mystery, embracing it, and knowing a life of love and following Christ in community is worth it, no matter the cost. Life is messy, and there are times when doubt comes in, but ultimately I know this is the right path for me.
It seems where you are now is in some senses where I started – raised with the scientific worldview and criticism of Christianity, left with seeing if I could find any value in the theist and Christian perspective despite this. For me choosing was never an option – meaning I would never close my eyes to what science has discovered in order to accept some religious POV. On the other hand, the thing about skepticism is it has no restrictions – it can be applied to itself to see that even skepticism has flaws and limits.
The result is that I have found value in Christianity but rejected much of the magical and anti-scientific aspects of it. It is necessarily supernatural only in the fact God is supernatural. But I don’t have to and don’t believe God breaks the laws of nature to interact with the world and our lives.
Let’s take the virgin birth for an example since you mention it. I have no emotional engagement, so I could take or leave it on that score. But consider it carefully. Is it really scientifically impossible? No, it is not. Birth certainly requires the fertilization of conception, but there is no actual biological dependence upon sex. And these days we routinely sidestep this ourselves with artificial insemination – and we even have virgin births because of it. So Mary giving birth to Jesus while a virgin? Not impossible, but certainly highly unlikely without artificial means. But are we not talking about an extremely rare miracle after all? Just saying…
And frankly this my approach to all the miracles as well. I see nothing which requires magic and many which have possible scientific explanations – however unlikely and thus miraculous. And even the resurrection… according to Paul in 1 Cor 15 that is a bodily resurrection to a spiritual/supernatural body about which science has nothing to say.
gbrooks9
(George Brooks, TE (E.volutionary T.heist OR P.rovidentialist))
4
Thank you for you reply, I am wondering if you have any views on organized religion in the US versus Europe ? have you seen any similarities in some countries ? While I agree with your part regarding the mystery part, for god and Christianity my brain would be able to align with that. It’s the part with Jesus that I find it more hard to grasp. Can you walk me through that ?
thanks for you reply, so what you are saying that it is OK to pick and choose what you like from the religion and go with it ? How does that land within your Christian community ? or are the communities not strict on what you believe in as long as you are a good participant ? or do you keep your view to yourself in order to avoid community clashes in some cases ? thank you
One of my basic starting points is truth, both as a retired scientist and as a believing Christian. The truth will outlive any lies or misunderstandings. Sometimes the search for the truth has lead to conclusions that some of the interpretations I or my friends have believed are not necessarily correct - interpretations are just interpretations, not infallible revelation.
An even more important finding has been that the core of Christianity is not in the doctrines, it is in the relationship with God. Without a living relationship with Him, Christianity turns easily to a burden of doctrines and rules you are supposed to obey.
In these, my path has probably been easier to correct as I am not a member of RCC and the congregation that I attend tolerates differing interpretations among members, except in the most fundamental Christian doctrines. There is an expectation of having an attitude of love as well in disagreements as in agreements. That affects the way how we should express our disagreements - not deny what I think is the truth but the way how I tell my opinion should be loving and accepting towards the brother or sister who disagrees in some matters. Still trying to learn that…
Good point with leaving the brains at the door, I understand how protestant feels different, I am only learning about it just recently and it feels its much simpler and syncs with my current state of mind than catholic. Do you have any advice about discussing this with my friend ? He seems quite a Catholic and I’m concerned that if I discuss this it would somehow not land well.
I guess I never lost completely faith in that there is a God. I just slipped far from living according to what I said I believed. What stopped me thinking was two situations.
One was when my buddies mentioned God in an agnostic or atheist way and I commented that I believe there is a God. My buddies were really surprised because nothing in my life indicated that I believe there is a God.
Soon after that a believer came to talk with me on a bus station. I told about my situation just neutrally, not feeling anything about the fact that I had slipped far from God. Although I just noted my situation without feelings or obvious regret, the internal conflict between my life and what I said I believed started a thinking process that finally ended in surrender to Jesus.
One difficulty I met after becoming a believer was related to doctrinal disagreements with my childhood church (Lutheran). I had defended strongly the doctrines of baptism and church but after studying the topics as thoroughly as I could at that point, I came to differing conclusions. Although my intellectual conclusion was that my previous beliefs were wrong, it was emotionally a really difficult step to act according to what I now considered true. My childhood church was also the church of my parents and relatives, so stepping out of the doctrines of the church was also a step away from my parents and relatives.
I am not telling this to argue about the doctrines, just to tell that following what I considered to be true was emotionally difficult.
Another difficult point came when I learned that sincere believers can teach matters that are false. As a young believer, I naively believed that what experienced believers told was true. I got books teaching Young Earth Creationism and as they seemed convincing, I adopted that teaching and started to spread it. I had just started university studies in biology and step-by-step, I learned that what was told as facts in the books were simply not true.
I had to reconstruct much of my worldview to get over these difficult points.
My basic thought is that Jesus’ death and resurrection were one off events, that cannot be explained or examined from a scientific standpoint. I have moved away from penal substitutionary atonement, due to the problems with that. Ultimately, I am pretty comfortable with not having all the answers, most of the time.
thank you for your honest words. To be honest, I am not sure where to start, all around me I think is Catholic but I am more inclined from what I saw so far to have more protestant views, or maybe go further into exploring what other churches offer. But I feel like I am religion shopping which is odd. Or maybe I start with myself with just prayer I guess ? I am confused to be honest, do you have any advice that could help me ?
Well you can start by looking more closely at the Catholic church and discovering that it is not as uniform as your local part of it might make it seem. Here is the google AI response to…
“Is there any diversity of belief in the roman catholic church”
Yes, significant diversity of belief and practice exists within the Roman Catholic Church, spanning cultural, theological, and liturgical spectrums, often described as “united, but not uniform”. While bound by core dogmas, the Church encompasses 24 autonomous Churches (including the Latin/Roman Church and 23 Eastern Churches), diverse cultural expressions, and varying theological approaches to moral issues.
And even this does not cover the diversities I have seen in publications by people among the clergy of the Catholic church. One result is that belief and attitudes about diversity can vary a lot when the pope changes. Far more conservative and unchanging is the eastern orthodox churches, so you might have some interest in looking at what they say too. Personally I have found many agreements with them on various issues even though I am not so sure that their unchanging conservative approach is always such a good thing.
As for your friend, that depend a great deal on your friend. I have met some very closed minded Catholics occasionally who simply will not listen to anything else.
1 Like
gbrooks9
(George Brooks, TE (E.volutionary T.heist OR P.rovidentialist))
15
What exactly is your point? Have you studied epistemology?
While some rash individuals might suggest rejecting the 7 day creation story
denies you the status of Christian, most mainstream Christians require at least
that you believe Jesus Equals God.
I speak from experience, since I am a Unitarian Universalist.
Welcome. Many us us have doubts here and have gone through intellectual rough patches. Best advice: doubt is okay but make sure you doubt your doubts. You are in luck if you want Catholic resources. Brant Pitre is wonderful (The Case for Jesus, Jesus and Divine Christology) for historical stuff along with Luke Timothy Johnson, Ed Feser (Five Proofs, Aquians, Aristotle Revenge, The Last Superstion and anything on his blog) for a robust philosophical defense of classical theism (honestly, the only tenable version) along with Eleonore Stump, Robert Koons and many others, the New Jerome Biblical Commentary is a wonderful scholarly repository and one stop shop for the Bible, also Word on Fire ministries (Bishop Barron) has some short classes on science and Bible (free for the first month) that are solid. Faith, Science, and Reason Theology on the Cutting Edge by Baglow was a text used in at Notre Dame in a side program and aside from the emergence Hokey Pokey, it is pretty solid. Stephen Barr should be solid and runs the Society of Catholic Scientists which has a Common questions section. The Biologis main page also has a common questions section that is up to 38 questions now.
John Walton is non-Catholic and I don’t agree with all he writes but his Lost World Series is a solid resource for understanding Genesis 1-11.
I have a long 18 page article on how to interpret Genesis 1 here and it basically applies to all of Genesis 1-11 and beyond. It covers a lot of issues and the logo extends to all of Genesis 1-11 and even beyond. Also one that reconciles Adam and Eve with evolution if you feel such is needed.
Honestly, I was very entrenched in atheism and it was the problem of evil that helped break my walls down, the same for Lewis. Then I read William Jame’s the Will to believe. It’s what I needed at the time. I was so stuck in the materialist mindset of requiring empirical evidence for everything while only believing in efficient and material causes. I basically had locked my own brain in prison and the warden was a mechanistic god.
And be careful of many of the responses and outlooks here. The website is great and the people here are generally friendly but the forum has a significant population of atheists and agnostics (and Christians who sympathize with them) and many Christians who appear on the outskirts of Orthodoxy.
Hi Tony, to be honest, I’m surprised you haven’t turned into a hardcore atheist after moving to Europe—lol. That, in itself, is a miracle. Europe is the very center of the Kali Yuga, the epicenter of the Great Apostasy. Yes, I believe we are living in the era of the Great Apostasy prophesied by Saint Paul. I may or may not be correct, but I believe the signs are there.
There is a spiritual blindness and barrenness in Europe—especially in Western Europe—that is not found anywhere else in the world (except perhaps China, Japan, and North Korea; but at least they were not the cradle of Christianity, unlike Europe. Europe’s apostasy is far graver).
Look, I’m Italian. We’re probably the least secularized country in Western Europe, and yet you can bet your skull that we are far more secularized than even the least religious state in the U.S. And the U.S. is far more secularized than, say, South America, Africa, or the Middle East.
So I’m not surprised at all by your trajectory.
Yes, I was raised Catholic, but my family belonged to what might best be described as nominal Christianity. We were the typical people who attended Mass on Christmas and Easter and considered the obligation fulfilled—so to speak. I received the Sacraments, learned how to pray, and acquired the basic external forms of the faith, but belief was never truly experienced or lived. Faith, in the existential sense, was largely absent.
As I mentioned earlier, there is indeed a profound spiritual barrenness in Europe, and this environment certainly played its part. Over time, all of this drew me further away from God and from His Church. Complicating matters, I was also born with a relatively low capacity for empathy toward others, which hardly helped. In retrospect, I displayed a number of traits associated with the so-called “Dark Triad.” I was never formally diagnosed as a psychopath or sociopath—though that may simply be because I never sought a diagnosis. In practice, my capacity for empathy was shallow, even toward those I ostensibly cared about.
Eventually, however, God led me to conversion, after I opened my heart to Him. I had grown profoundly weary of the person I was. At the time, I did not even believe in God’s existence; I regarded it as no more likely than the existence of the tooth fairy. And yet, I asked Him—if He existed—to change me. I asked because, hypothetical as He seemed to me, He was the only entity who could have accomplished such a transformation, had He indeed existed.
What followed was my conversion. I have described the process in greater detail elsewhere Heaven on earth, heaven as some other place and heat death - #58 by 1Cor15.54 In addition, my family was also led to conversion through a series of other events—and those were definitely evil spiritual events. I won’t go into details here, but it is often the case that God permits evil in order to bring about a greater good.
The bottom line is this: you are not alone, brother. Many have followed a similar trajectory. And, as I said before, the very fact that you moved to what may well be the epicenter of the Kali Yuga (a Hindu term that stuck with me) and did not become a hardcore atheist is, in itself, something of a miracle—one might even say an empirical one.
I will be blunt: given the sheer range of problematic things (from a materialist perspective) out there—most notably the hard problem of consciousness, near-death experiences, terminal lucidity, the lives of the saints, and so forth—refusing even to remain open to the possibility of the supernatural strikes me as the very opposite of intellectual honesty. I am not suggesting that atheism is inconceivable; rather, I am arguing that, at a minimum, an open agnosticism appears far more compatible with intellectual integrity than strict atheism or uncompromising materialism.
Only a few days ago, I quoted several atheists, with links and everything redirecting to their writings, who claimed that they would not believe in Jesus even if they were to witness Him rising from the dead, preferring instead to interpret such an event as the work of a highly advanced extraterrestrial intelligence or something analogous. Does that seem compatible with intellectual honesty in any way, shape or form to you?
That said, it is hardly surprising that you raise this question. We live in a cultural context in which spirituality—and Christianity in particular—has been so thoroughly ridiculed and marginalized that we are effectively raised to assume materialism as the default worldview. * Any alternative is instinctively dismissed as a product of wishful thinking. Under such conditions, it is understandable to wonder whether intellectual honesty and spiritual openness can genuinely coexist.
The answer, in my view, is an unequivocal yes. I would even go so far as to argue that dogmatic materialism itself represents a negation of intellectual honesty.
Christ is alive, brother.
*Just think about comedians posing as scientists—like this Scientist explains why life after death 'is impossible' | Metro News Sean Carroll guy—who claims that we already understand everything and that life after physical death is impossible. It’s an obviously absurd claim, yet it aligns so neatly with the spirit of our age that many people accept it without question.
We live in an era in which many people believe that child transgenderism might be a good thing and should be permitted—an era in which people think you can actually change your sex, rather than merely your outward appearance, as if you could alter your essential biological reality, as if you could change your cromosoms from XY to XX or vice versa. Can you imagine believing that? Is that really more unreasonable to believe that God exists and can intervene in history?
We are living in a time when craziness is celebrated as sanity, and sanity is dismissed as craziness.
Gilbert Keith Chesterton prophesied all of this many, many years ago—more than a century ago, in fact.
“The great march of mental destruction will go on. Everything will be denied. Everything will become a creed. It is a reasonable position to deny the stones in the street; it will be a religious dogma to assert them. It is a rational thesis that we are all in a dream; it will be a mystical sanity to say that we are all awake. Fires will be kindled to testify that two and two make four. Swords will be drawn to prove that leaves are green in summer. We shall be left defending, not only the incredible virtues and sanities of human life, but something more incredible still, this huge impossible universe which stares us in the face. We shall fight for visible prodigies as if they were invisible. We shall look on the impossible grass and the skies with a strange courage. We shall be of those who have seen and yet have believed.”
By the way, @Tony1 , it’s not that I want to make an endorsement or anything, but especially this man right here is worth listening to—seriously. That’s just my humble advice; make of it what you will.
I went through my doubting much younger than you, in my 20’s in an Anglican church in UK. But in the church choir I kept looking for reasons to believe and belong rather than reasons not to. I started reading liberal theology about Christ as prophet etc and reasons to follow Christ because what He said in the gospels is so true of what life is like and that is necessary to have a change of life and attitudes not just for ourselves but for wider society.
it was gradually that I read defences of Christ as Son of God and that He was more than just Jesus the man and the gospels are based on the real experiences and witness of those who followed Him and preached Him as Crucified and Risen Lord.
I also came to realise that the distrust in miracles that began in the period of the Enlightenment were due to specific view of the world that just said they could not happen. It is a philosophical bias by materialists rather thinking that God as Creator can do new and surprising things and interact with the world in special ways for people to accomplish special revelation. We cannot prove that any part of the bible is completely accurate but we can reckon that behind the stories were real encounters with God that shaped their lives.
My current thinking is now summarised on a website. (Please excuse the self advertising). www.cosmicscotus.com
Creationists won’t agree with it but I hope it will help others trying to relate faith to science. It’s now also the basis for a book I have published on Amazon. Details on the website.
