Figuring Out Religion

[Pointedstick]

Okay, let's try one that is part science, part religion.  What are your thoughts?

What are the Odds of You Being You?

http://www.reasons.org/articles/what-ar ... -being-you

... Mountaineer

My immediate thought is that the odds being infinitesimally small of me being me isn't a miracle. It's just life. If a different sperm had penetrated the egg, my mother would have given birth to someone else. If a different egg had ben released that month, same thing. And so on. Similarly, if I had walked in a different direction 10 years ago, I would never have met my now wife and the course of my life would have been totally radically different. That's just it: things would have simply been different. Our entire lives are made up of these kinds of events that combine to create the inputs of our life. I don't really see God in any of these gazillions of mundane daily happenings.

[Jan Van]

...you just have to know how to read the Scriptures or you will come away with a very much skewed understanding.  For what it's worth, I too used to question much and/or think Scripture did not make rational sense - that is so true, it is not a subject to only use logic to understand...

Couldn't He/She have been a bit more clear. He/She must have known people would misinterpret Him/Her by doing it this way. Same I suppose with the Koran. If it's so hard to understand the real meaning, how can we blame Boko Haram for putting the teaching into practice the way they see is correct? (Apart from the fact their actions are monstrous).

[moda0306]

For anyone here, did the act of getting married and/or having kids directly or indirectly contribute to the status of your faith today?

How do you approach your children on the topic?

[iwealth]

For anyone here, did the act of getting married and/or having kids directly or indirectly contribute to the status of your faith today?

How do you approach your children on the topic?

My wife and I were both raised Roman Catholic and we went through the motions essentially starting from birth. We both attended Roman Catholic schools from K-12 and then attended a Jesuit university. The K-12 schools were our parents' choice, and the college was close to home. Despite never feeling any strong attachment to this faith, I went along for the ride because it's just what you do (did). It started so early. I took required religion classes from ages 6 through 20. Freedom of thought on the subject wasn't exactly encouraged.

But back to your question, my son was born 6 months ago and his impending birth pushed me even farther from faith. Childhood religious indoctrination just isn't my cup of tea. If some God reveals itself to my son during his life, so be it. In the meantime, we're going to laugh and play and he'll learn what it means to be a decent human being absent the threat of impending doom should he decide believing in a supernatural deity doesn't suit his personality.

And I can rest assured knowing that the promise of an afterlife of pleasantries is what he needs to get through the day, there'll be plenty of people selling what he's trying to find.

[Mountaineer]

For anyone here, did the act of getting married and/or having kids directly or indirectly contribute to the status of your faith today?

How do you approach your children on the topic?

Both my wife and children (and grandchildren and great grandchildren) remind me of the incredible gifts God has brought into my life (a Savior, family, friends, capacity to love and work, sufficient material goods).  My wife did the religious heavy lifting during much of our children's formative years; I was in my "dry period" re. attending formal church services although I was very supportive of religion in our home life.  Basically, going to church was just something they did and enjoyed.  My children are both adults now with children, and grandchildren, of their own in one case.  They are all Christian, my daughter has an even stronger faith than me, and my son and his family frequently but not always attend church services; their children both have a good appreciation of God.  I'd say that we all know God is the source of right and wrong (Scripture says it is written on our hearts); it is pretty obvious to all without having Scripture quoted to them that it is just plain wrong to punch Grandma in the nose 

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

...you just have to know how to read the Scriptures or you will come away with a very much skewed understanding.  For what it's worth, I too used to question much and/or think Scripture did not make rational sense - that is so true, it is not a subject to only use logic to understand...

Couldn't He/She have been a bit more clear. He/She must have known people would misinterpret Him/Her by doing it this way. Same I suppose with the Koran. If it's so hard to understand the real meaning, how can we blame Boko Haram for putting the teaching into practice the way they see is correct? (Apart from the fact their actions are monstrous).

Your comments illustrate my point.  God is clearly a HE in the Scriptures.  Only the PCness of the current generation or two want to make God in their image rather than vice versa. 

... Mountaineer

[madbean]

Theological answer:  Original sin.

Practical answer:  If they deem the children as "not innocent".  If they kill in abstentia (e.g. a remote drone pilot).  If they convince themselves the victims aren't really as "human" as the killer or his culture.  If they think there is a good chance the children will grow up and be worse off than if dead.  If they think what they are doing is for the greater good.  If they think the killing is not a reflection of their own sinfulness.  If they think they are not sinners.  Etc., Etc.

You left off if the "Word of God" directly commands it.....

“This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"

1 Samuel 15:2-3 but just one example from the Bible. I can give more.

Much of the OT (from the very first people, Adam and Eve, who decided to rely on themselves instead of God) to the end of the prophesies is a story of how life unwinds when people disregard God.  The Scriptures are pointing toward the need for a Savior since man is unable to save himself.  Unfortunately, many hold the view that you gave in your post.  That is why, as Desert says, it is very important to have a theologian who believes in God's Word be your guide; as you point out, I would never want to think I learned Scriptural truth from a Bart Eherman any more than I would want to learn calculus from a Spanish literature teacher.  On a second subject, the pre-incarnate Jesus is all over the OT, you just have to know how to read the Scriptures or you will come away with a very much skewed understanding.  For what it's worth, I too used to question much and/or think Scripture did not make rational sense - that is so true, it is not a subject to only use logic to understand.  If you expect to use man's flawed reason to understand all that is important in life, well, God help you.

... Mountaineer

My quote didn't come from Bart Ehrman. I copied it directly from the Bible and I don't see what is so hard to understand about it that I would need somebody to explain it to me. The Bible says that God was so angry at the Amalekites for something they did hundreds of years earlier that he commanded Saul through the prophet Samuel to destroy not only every man, woman, and child, and infant but even the "cattle, sheep, camels, and donkeys". Talk about being pissed.

Saul proceeded to do what God commanded except that he decided to spare king Agag. When the prophet Samuel found out about it, he finished the job by hacking Agag to pieces himself and told Saul that because he didn't complete the job as ordered the kingdom would be taken from him and given to David, a man after his own heart who would do all of his will.

If I got any part of that story wrong, feel free to correct me.

[Mountaineer]

madbean,

Context, context, context is everything*.  Obviously, the quoted material from the Scriptures that you used is accurate.  However, I would have a different conclusion about God than you came away with.  Some other things to think about that may, or not, be helpful:

God uses many natural tools (people, natural events such as earthquakes, meteors, floods, etc.) to achieve his purposes.  Since Scripture says that God cannot lie, always does things for good - not evil, and wants us to follow His will (e.g. the 10 Words of the OT or 10 Commandments as commonly known), we should look for and try to understand the bigger picture instead of cherry picking verses out of context.

For example, God created every thing "good"; He did not create robots, but created people with an ability to refuse His Word.  The very first people screwed up; God rightly punished them, i.e. the curse described in Genesis 3. 

God chose certain people of to bring the Savior into the world and really gets pissed when people and Satan try to interfere with his plan.  Genesis 3:15 is the first Gospel in the Scriptures - the Serpent is Satan who will bruise man's heel, He (Jesus) will crush the head of the serpent (Satan).  In other words, from the very beginning God had a plan (Jesus on the cross) to save us, even when we disobey Him then and now.  Who resisted God's chosen people, i.e. tried to thwart God's plan for bringing Jesus to the world? - the Amalekites, the Egyptians, the Caanites, among others.  What happened to them for that resistance?

Who resisted doing God's wishes?  God's chosen people who did not obey God's wishes - pillar of salt, destruction of cities, Sodom and Gamorah, golden calf, false gods, immoral behavior, etc.  What happened?  The Assyrians, the Mesopotamians, the Babylonian captivity, overthrow by foreign nations. 

Bottom line - God is really, really serious about what He tells us and is a jealous God (1st Commandment) who does not want us to have ANY other Gods, including ourself.  When we don't believe in God's promises, prepare to be burnt toast.  If we depend on ourself to do what is right, we will find it is impossible to do so; the solution God gave us to avoid being burnt toast is Jesus.  God is a wrathful God, no question, if you do not repent from your evil ways and follow His will and believe His promises.  God is also a God of mercy, no question, for those who believe His promises.  Just like parents are perceived by their children as mean and wrathful when the child does not obey and just like the children appreciate their parents when there are lots of nice gifts at Christmas time.  I believe in God's promises and am forgiven of all my sins, thanks be to God.

* A helpful book to get a good understanding of context and thus better understand Scripture is "What Does This Mean? 2nd Edition" subtitled 'Principles of Biblical Interpretation in the Post-Modern World' by James W. Voelz, copyright 2003.

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

Okay, I think I understand.  What I hear you saying is you are a product of a postmodern worldview.  My wife and I just had a conversation on how do you ever influence anyone of the postmodern mindset to believe ANYTHING as it seems those with that world view think everyones' view of the "truth" is correct for that person.  I'm speaking of the moral/philosophical/metaphysical/religion stuff more so than material things.  Is there a way?  What would make you stop and think, "wow, that really makes sense, I had not thought of it that way before"?

It's actually really easy to convince me of something. You just present your case with supporting evidence and if I feel like it's convincing enough, then boom, you've convinced me!

I acknowledge that this is easy for the material realm, but hard for the moral/philosophical/metaphysical one. That's why I don't believe in absolute truth there. Forget religions for a moment… there have been untold thousands or millions of philosophies. Which one is "right?" The Stoics? The Humanists? The Utilitarians? Etc. I feel like it's better to approach these philosophies from the perspective of asking what wisdom they encompass rather than trying to brand them as wrong or find The Right One™ that's absolutely right about everything. I love philosophy, though, and I've found that my enjoyment of the subject was immeasurably improved by stepping out a judgmental mindset and just looking at philosophies as products of their time with historical and social context with their own interesting messages, many of which are still relevant today.

PS,

Are you game for commenting on another article?  If so, what do you think of this one?

http://www.reasons.org/articles/the-physics-of-sin

Excerpt:
Why didn't God create a different kind of cosmos for humanity—one elegant and beautiful in its design yet without the hard choices, pain, and suffering produced by evil? God does, in fact, promise a radically different, perfectly wonderful home for humanity after His final judgment against evil (referred to in Revelation as The Great White Throne Judgment). So why didn't He make the universe "perfect" in the first place?


... Mountaineer

[madbean]

Obviously, the quoted material from the Scriptures that you used is accurate.  However, I would have a different conclusion about God than you came away with.  Some other things to think about that may, or not, be helpful:

I didn't state anything about my own conclusion from that story but if you want one it's that I simply don't believe it. If this person named Samuel even existed and he did give that commandment then I don't for one minute think it actually came from God, but rather from his own angry mind.

(and why is it "cherry picking" when I tell a Bible story but not when you quote verses to us?)

[Pointedstick]

PS,

Are you game for commenting on another article?  If so, what do you think of this one?

http://www.reasons.org/articles/the-physics-of-sin

Excerpt:
Why didn't God create a different kind of cosmos for humanity—one elegant and beautiful in its design yet without the hard choices, pain, and suffering produced by evil? God does, in fact, promise a radically different, perfectly wonderful home for humanity after His final judgment against evil (referred to in Revelation as The Great White Throne Judgment). So why didn't He make the universe "perfect" in the first place?


... Mountaineer

To be honest, Mountaineer, I'm not sure what this is supposed to accomplish. This whole website seems aimed at Christians who may be distrustful of science, not unbelievers who are distrustful of Christianity. The stuff I'm finding there isn't really very meaningful to me.

For example:

Why didn't God create a different kind of cosmos for humanity—one elegant and beautiful in its design yet without the hard choices, pain, and suffering produced by evil?

This is a sentence that is meaningless to me. It's a question I've never asked, since I don't believe in God.

A perhaps more appropriate line of questioning, if you'll permit me to talk to myself for a moment, might be, "Why is there suffering in this world?" But to me the obvious answer is "because among other reasons, the scarcity of nutrients requires that life consume other life to continue living, and if the other life is capable of feeling distress, there you go." A follow-up question might be, "why are life-forms capable of feeling distress?" and my answer might be, "it is an evolutionary adaptation to encourage life-forms to avoid danger." A broader, more philosophical follow-up would be, "why did life evolve in such a manner as to require the suffering of other life?" And to that, I would have to admit that I do not know the answer. And the prospect of not knowing the answer does not fill me with some kind of cosmic dread or burning need to discover it. I simply accept that I don't know and move on with my life, safe in the knowledge that if I ever decide to try and figure out and answer, there will be no shortage of thought-provoking information and perspectives for me to learn about.

[Mountaineer]

Obviously, the quoted material from the Scriptures that you used is accurate.  However, I would have a different conclusion about God than you came away with.  Some other things to think about that may, or not, be helpful:

I didn't state anything about my own conclusion from that story but if you want one it's that I simply don't believe it. If this person named Samuel even existed and he did give that commandment then I don't for one minute think it actually came from God, but rather from his own angry mind.

(and why is it "cherry picking" when I tell a Bible story but not when you quote verses to us?)

Dear mad,

I do my best to not cherry pick out of context (remember I began my previous post with context, context, context); I'm sure I have erred on that as I have much, much study to do to know a fraction of what the theological heavyweights know/knew, but I still try to explain Scripture to the best of my ability; I do not try to explain Scripture to fit my personal agenda - I think God's agenda is plenty big enough.  I view Scripture as objective truth and let it be its own defense.  Again, I frequently fail at that too.  I try to help people see that the God of wrath (a real turnoff for many people that they are unable to get past) is only a God of wrath for those who refuse the gift of mercy and forgiveness that is so freely offered.  I hope all people will not experience the gnashing of teeth after it is too late but I fear Scripture says otherwise (Can't you just imagine all those gnashing, grinding, teeth and bitten bloody lips and tongues in hell still exclaiming "I hate God" as they did prior to their eternal damnation?).

Sorry I jumped to conclusions about your conclusion ... but your statement above seems to indicate I did not make much of a jump.

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

PS,

Are you game for commenting on another article?  If so, what do you think of this one?

http://www.reasons.org/articles/the-physics-of-sin

Excerpt:
Why didn't God create a different kind of cosmos for humanity—one elegant and beautiful in its design yet without the hard choices, pain, and suffering produced by evil? God does, in fact, promise a radically different, perfectly wonderful home for humanity after His final judgment against evil (referred to in Revelation as The Great White Throne Judgment). So why didn't He make the universe "perfect" in the first place?


... Mountaineer

To be honest, Mountaineer, I'm not sure what this is supposed to accomplish. This whole website seems aimed at Christians who may be distrustful of science, not unbelievers who are distrustful of Christianity. The stuff I'm finding there isn't really very meaningful to me.

For example:

Why didn't God create a different kind of cosmos for humanity—one elegant and beautiful in its design yet without the hard choices, pain, and suffering produced by evil?

This is a sentence that is meaningless to me. It's a question I've never asked, since I don't believe in God.

A perhaps more appropriate line of questioning, if you'll permit me to talk to myself for a moment, might be, "Why is there suffering in this world?" But to me the obvious answer is "because among other reasons, the scarcity of nutrients requires that life consume other life to continue living, and if the other life is capable of feeling distress, there you go." A follow-up question might be, "why are life-forms capable of feeling distress?" and my answer might be, "it is an evolutionary adaptation to encourage life-forms to avoid danger." A broader, more philosophical follow-up would be, "why did life evolve in such a manner as to require the suffering of other life?" And to that, I would have to admit that I do not know the answer. And the prospect of not knowing the answer does not fill me with some kind of cosmic dread or burning need to discover it. I simply accept that I don't know and move on with my life, safe in the knowledge that if I ever decide to try and figure out and answer, there will be no shortage of thought-provoking information and perspectives for me to learn about.

Pointedstick,

Fair enough.  I appreciate your honesty.  I'll try to stop with the apologetics.  I do think this interchange gives creedance to the notion that apologetics rarely if ever saves anyone - only hearing the Gospel has that capability, and the first step is to recognize that one is a sinner and is beyond all hope of ever being able to save himself.  But, and this is a big but, if one does not care what happens after temporal death, I doubt any human is capable of changing that mindset ... but that does not stop me from caring about those who do not for now care about themselves (Oh the blessings, or is it curse, of the invincible youth).  Weird huh?  I've just got to keep casting those seeds; perhaps one will take firm root and God will choose to water it.

... Mountaineer

[iwealth]

Mountaineer,

I have a legitimate question for you or anyone else. What does Scripture say comes to the person that internally believes in God but outwardly denies this belief? I bet there are a lot of these folk among us, not necessarily on this forum, but in general society. I imagine we're in a time where many people who simply aren't knowledgeable enough to differentiate Roman Catholicism from Christianity may feel embarrassed by the abhorrent behavior of Catholic priests constantly in the news. 

[Pointedstick]

Weird huh?  I've just got to keep casting those seeds; perhaps one will take firm root and God will choose to water it.

If God chooses not to water it, and I did a non-Christian, does that not imply that God would be responsible for my going to Hell? That's certainly what your plant-based metaphor suggests. If a domestic plant is not watered by its gardener, its death is the gardener's fault.

[Mountaineer]

Weird huh?  I've just got to keep casting those seeds; perhaps one will take firm root and God will choose to water it.

If God chooses not to water it, and I did a non-Christian, does that not imply that God would be responsible for my going to Hell? That's certainly what your plant-based metaphor suggests. If a domestic plant is not watered by its gardener, its death is the gardener's fault.

Why some and not others (are chosen)?  That is trying to understand the mind of God, the hidden side of God, dare say I wanting to be like God.  All I can tell you is the answer to that question is not revealed in Scripture.  It is on my list of things to ask God when I'm with Him forever.  All I can tell you is what Jesus said.  Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”?

Note that Jesus says baptize, and teach - he does not say the ones taught have to learn everything perfectly and do everything perfectly.  Just my observation.

I would say that if the gift is offered, and you choose to refuse the gift, you are the one who has determined the outcome of your not having the gift - not the giver of the gift (please recognize that is another metaphor and all metaphors fall short of the reality they are trying to convey on some level).  And yes, if a domestic plant is not watered by its gardener, it will die.  I am glad that the gardener, in the metaphor , does state His desire for all His plants who desire his water to live.  It is strange to understand that in order to receive the benefit, all you have to do is believe the benefit is there and does what it claims to do.

... Mountaineer

[moda0306]

Mountaineer,

If we can't understand the mind of God (if there is a God, I'm almost certain you are correct), then how can we say with any certainty that he loves us.  It sure seems like he's sending a ton of mixed messages.

[Mountaineer]

Mountaineer,

I have a legitimate question for you or anyone else. What does Scripture say comes to the person that internally believes in God but outwardly denies this belief? I bet there are a lot of these folk among us, not necessarily on this forum, but in general society. I imagine we're in a time where many people who simply aren't knowledgeable enough to differentiate Roman Catholicism from Christianity may feel embarrassed by the abhorrent behavior of Catholic priests constantly in the news.

iwealth,

Could you please clarify your question, I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at.  Do you mean something like inwardly believe Christ's promises but tell the Islamic executioner "praise Allah, I convert" so you don't get killed?  And the part about differentiating RC from Christianity I don't get ... Help!

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

Mountaineer,

If we can't understand the mind of God (if there is a God, I'm almost certain you are correct), then how can we say with any certainty that he loves us.  It sure seems like he's sending a ton of mixed messages.

We can't understand the hidden side of God.  Him saying He loves us is clearly stated in the revealed side of God (Scripture), John 3:16 for one.  Am I missing something in your question?


... Mountaineer

[iwealth]

iwealth,

Could you please clarify your question, I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at.  Do you mean something like inwardly believe Christ's promises but tell the Islamic executioner "praise Allah, I convert" so you don't get killed?  And the part about differentiating RC from Christianity I don't get ... Help!

... Mountaineer

The executioner example is one, yes, but I was referring to more everyday situations. For instance, most of a believer's friends are non-believers. During a heated conversation about faith, a non-confrontational believer decides it is easier to agree with the crowd rather than admit his/her true beliefs. It strikes me this wouldn't (shouldn't) be acceptable according to Scripture. But if all that is required is that one believes, I'm unsure.

As far as the RC/Christianity comment, I guess it's not totally relevant to my question. I meant that I'm pretty sure there are a lot of Catholics out there simply don't know any better and believe that all Christians are Catholics. And since the Catholic church sex scandals hit the news hard over the past few years, I've encountered a few newly minted non-believers. I question whether they truly feel that way or if they are just taking the easy way out to avoid associating themselves publicly with something a bit distasteful.

Heck I'm a big Penn State football fan and it's tough for me to admit that in public these days!

[Mountaineer]

iwealth,

Could you please clarify your question, I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at.  Do you mean something like inwardly believe Christ's promises but tell the Islamic executioner "praise Allah, I convert" so you don't get killed?  And the part about differentiating RC from Christianity I don't get ... Help!

... Mountaineer

The executioner example is one, yes, but I was referring to more everyday situations. For instance, most of a believer's friends are non-believers. During a heated conversation about faith, a non-confrontational believer decides it is easier to agree with the crowd rather than admit his/her true beliefs. It strikes me this wouldn't (shouldn't) be acceptable according to Scripture. But if all that is required is that one believes, I'm unsure.

As far as the RC/Christianity comment, I guess it's not totally relevant to my question. I meant that I'm pretty sure there are a lot of Catholics out there simply don't know any better and believe that all Christians are Catholics. And since the Catholic church sex scandals hit the news hard over the past few years, I've encountered a few newly minted non-believers. I question whether they truly feel that way or if they are just taking the easy way out to avoid associating themselves publicly with something a bit distasteful.

Heck I'm a big Penn State football fan and it's tough for me to admit that in public these days!

iwealth,

Thanks for the clarification.  I think I understand your question.  My comments and a selected but representative Scripture selection - particularly verse 33:

Jesus says, Mt 10:26 “So have no fear of them, for nothing is covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. 27 What I tell you in the dark, say in the light, and what you hear whispered, proclaim on the housetops. 28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. 30 But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows. 32 So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, 33 but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.

The notes on from my Lutheran Study Bible state: 
MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:30 What no person would want to do, our Father has done: counted each hair on our heads. He knows us down to the minutest detail. MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:31 Fear not. For the third time, Jesus tells His disciples not to be afraid (vv 26, 28). more value. The disciples had vastly greater value than a small bird. They had nothing to fear, because God blesses and rules over all creation. MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:32 Jesus promised His disciples that if they fearlessly confessed Him on earth, He would stand up for them before His heavenly Father at the last judgment and accept them into eternal life. See LSB, p 272. MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:33 Those who, from fear or doubt, deny Jesus will be denied by Jesus on Judgment Day. To deny Jesus is to reject the One who brings us to the Father (Jn 14:6; Eph 2:18). MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:26–33 Enemies of the Gospel can persecute believers only within limits set by our heavenly Father. Because He is in charge of our lives, we need not be afraid of those who oppose us because we confess Christ. At the last judgment, our Lord will recognize faithful service and acknowledge us as His followers. We are confident of His love not because of what we have done but because He died and rose to redeem us from sin, death, and the power of the devil.

So, that sounds to me like one who denies Jesus, for whatever reason, is in serious peril of eternal damnation.  I hope the people that are in that condition, receive the gift of repentance and pray for God's mercy.

... Mountaineer

[madbean]

(Can't you just imagine all those gnashing, grinding, teeth and bitten bloody lips and tongues in hell still exclaiming "I hate God" as they did prior to their eternal damnation?).

No, I can't really imagine that and don't really want to.

I can see that God has chosen to bless you with a much clearer vision of these things than most of us.

[hazlitt777]

Later on, when I have some more time, I will try to respond to some of the questions here.  For now, I would recommend you taking a look at the Catechism of the Catholic Church to get an overview of what we believe and why we believe it.  There will be much there that other Christians would agree with but not all of course.  It would be a good place to start.

Here is a link:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

A quick response to the Bible having contradictory passages:  We shouldn't approach the Bible as if it is a history book.  We believe it was inspired by God to teach us how to live and the structure of the cosmos, in traditional terms, morals and faith.  So sometimes you will come across history, other times fables (Jonah) other times myth (the creation story)  What we believe is that God inspired these texts to speak to us through these various genres of literature, but to speak to us of faith and morals, what the world and cosmos looks like, its origin and destiny, and also how to live to realize our destiny as humans.  Why would God be limited to just using form or literature?  Just some food for thought.

[Pointedstick]

A quick response to the Bible having contradictory passages:  We shouldn't approach the Bible as if it is a history book.  We believe it was inspired by God to teach us how to live and the structure of the cosmos, in traditional terms, morals and faith.  So sometimes you will come across history, other times fables (Jonah) other times myth (the creation story)  What we believe is that God inspired these texts to speak to us through these various genres of literature, but to speak to us of faith and morals, what the world and cosmos looks like, its origin and destiny, and also how to live to realize our destiny as humans.  Why would God be limited to just using form or literature?  Just some food for thought.

Sounds like you're going straight to hell! J/K. I actually agree with you and wish I heard more of that kind of view. It strikes me as a much more nuanced, adult reading of the Bible.

[Mountaineer]

iwealth,

Could you please clarify your question, I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at.  Do you mean something like inwardly believe Christ's promises but tell the Islamic executioner "praise Allah, I convert" so you don't get killed?  And the part about differentiating RC from Christianity I don't get ... Help!

... Mountaineer

The executioner example is one, yes, but I was referring to more everyday situations. For instance, most of a believer's friends are non-believers. During a heated conversation about faith, a non-confrontational believer decides it is easier to agree with the crowd rather than admit his/her true beliefs. It strikes me this wouldn't (shouldn't) be acceptable according to Scripture. But if all that is required is that one believes, I'm unsure.

As far as the RC/Christianity comment, I guess it's not totally relevant to my question. I meant that I'm pretty sure there are a lot of Catholics out there simply don't know any better and believe that all Christians are Catholics. And since the Catholic church sex scandals hit the news hard over the past few years, I've encountered a few newly minted non-believers. I question whether they truly feel that way or if they are just taking the easy way out to avoid associating themselves publicly with something a bit distasteful.

Heck I'm a big Penn State football fan and it's tough for me to admit that in public these days!

iwealth,

Thanks for the clarification.  I think I understand your question.  My comments and a selected but representative Scripture selection - particularly verse 33:

Jesus says, Mt 10:26 “So have no fear of them, for nothing is covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. 27 What I tell you in the dark, say in the light, and what you hear whispered, proclaim on the housetops. 28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. 30 But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows. 32 So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, 33 but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.

The notes on from my Lutheran Study Bible state: 
MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:30 What no person would want to do, our Father has done: counted each hair on our heads. He knows us down to the minutest detail. MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:31 Fear not. For the third time, Jesus tells His disciples not to be afraid (vv 26, 28). more value. The disciples had vastly greater value than a small bird. They had nothing to fear, because God blesses and rules over all creation. MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:32 Jesus promised His disciples that if they fearlessly confessed Him on earth, He would stand up for them before His heavenly Father at the last judgment and accept them into eternal life. See LSB, p 272. MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:33 Those who, from fear or doubt, deny Jesus will be denied by Jesus on Judgment Day. To deny Jesus is to reject the One who brings us to the Father (Jn 14:6; Eph 2:18). MATTHEW—NOTE ON 10:26–33 Enemies of the Gospel can persecute believers only within limits set by our heavenly Father. Because He is in charge of our lives, we need not be afraid of those who oppose us because we confess Christ. At the last judgment, our Lord will recognize faithful service and acknowledge us as His followers. We are confident of His love not because of what we have done but because He died and rose to redeem us from sin, death, and the power of the devil.

So, that sounds to me like one who denies Jesus, for whatever reason, is in serious peril of eternal damnation.  I hope the people that are in that condition, receive the gift of repentance and pray for God's mercy.

... Mountaineer

iwealth,

I have a little time now to give a more complete response; hope it helps answer your question.  The following is from my Lutheran Bible Companion two volume set (an excellent resource that is very complimentary to my Lutheran Study Bible, ESV translation).  Both of these resources are available from Concordia Publishing House (CPH) and Amazon - just be sure to get the CPH version of the study Bible if you order from Amazon.  They are really good resouces, in my opinion, for anyone who values the "Scripture interprets Scripture (typical Lutheran)" method of interpretation more than or in addition to other methods such as "Anyone reading the Bible is inspired to interpret Scripture by himself (typical Baptist or Fundamentalist)" or, "only a certain person is qualified to interpret Scripture (typical Roman Catholic)"- I'm not trying to take any cheap shots, both of those groups are Christian and I have many friends of both of those traditions; I'm just trying to point out different hermeneutical methods.  I won't discuss those who interpret the Scriptures by the "comic book method"  .  Anyway, back to my additional material:

The Unpardonable Sin

Matthew 12:31-32 states: “Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.  And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”?

Acts 13:39 asserts: “And by Him everyone who believes is freed from everything from which you could not be freed by the law of Moses.”?

The difficulty here is caused by the statement that there is an unpardonable sin, which seems to contradict the many passages of which Acts 13:39 is typical, saying that all who believe in Jesus will receive forgiveness of their sins.  It seems that the Gospel promises, which offer pardon for the sins we commit when we turn to Jesus in true faith, are so comprehensive that no sin can be excluded.  This view is correct.  Not a single sin is excluded from the category of those that will be forgiven when the sinner seeks refuge in Jesus.  Believe, and you are pardoned.  But the unpardonable sin of which Jesus speaks has this characteristic: that the one committing it does not, and will not, believe in Jesus Christ.  The Lord is describing the sin as blasphemy directed against the Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit is that person of the Trinity who coverts us.  If a person blasphemes against Him and does not let the Holy Spirit do and sustain His work, this person cannot be a believer and hence cannot receive forgiveness of sins.  The words of Jesus may be paraphrased thus:  “Beware of opposing the Holy Spirit who seeks to bring about, or has brought about, your regeneration  If the Holy Spirit does not regenerate you, you cannot receive forgiveness.”?  Therefore the text quoted are not contradictory.  It will be observed that Mt 12:31-32 does not oppose the statement that every sinner who believes in Jesus will be forgiven.  The sin it describes is simply such that it excludes repentance and faith in Christ.  Perhaps the most important point to remember is that no one who repents of his or her sins and seeks refuge in the wounds of Christ has committed the sin against the Holy Spirit. 

... Mountaineer