Figuring Out Religion

[Mountaineer]

What I don't understand is why God would write a book proving his existence that is so unconvincing that I have to read another human beings interpretation of Gods book in order to understand it. I mean, this is the God who created heaven and earth. If Newton can convincingly explain calculus in a book, I would think that God could at least create a work that an intelligent human being would immediately see the truth in....especially a book which would at least overwhelm the sense of rational logic that he hard wired into me.

Are you sure that your sense of rational logic is hardwired and not software?  My understanding is that a very heavy emphasis on rational thought came with the "enlightenment" which began in ernest in the 17th century.  Software gets updated frequently so perhaps, just perhaps, you will find the "logic" in the original source code ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

I am going to start posting a link to a few pages at a time of "What They Need to Hear"  by Klemet Preus.  I figured out how to do it (I think!) without excruciating effort  .  This is the book I recommended a few posts back. 

The preface to the book is first, the first letter, What is a Miracle, is second.  I would appreciate feedback from you all on whether anyone wishes to read more before I end up copying a lot of material no one wishes to see. 

Preface: https://www.dropbox.com/s/4r8d0kn6cwvgp ... reface.pdf

Letter 1: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5aj39u18gd6p8 ... iracle.pdf

... Mountaineer

[doodle]

In letter 1, I dont see any proof for the virgin birth of the baby Jesus.

He states that miracles such as the virgin birth are by definition are impossible because they defy the laws of nature. Only God is able to defy the laws of nature because it was he after all that created such laws. Therefore a God must exist in order to defy the laws of nature so that Mary could have a virgin birth...

Im missing the evidence here for B.

A is impossible unless B exists.

B exists, therefore A is possible.

[doodle]

At the end of the day i just want Christians to accept that i dont have to go to hell just because I dont believe that Jesus was the son of God. The pope already said it Mountaineer, so why cant you go along with that? I would declare a truce on Christianity if they would do that. :-)

[Mountaineer]

In letter 1, I dont see any proof for the virgin birth of the baby Jesus.

He states that miracles such as the virgin birth are by definition are impossible because they defy the laws of nature. Only God is able to defy the laws of nature because it was he after all that created such laws. Therefore a God must exist in order to defy the laws of nature so that Mary could have a virgin birth...

Im missing the evidence here for B.

A is impossible unless B exists.

B exists, therefore A is possible.

Virgin Birth is discussed in letters 5 and 6.  There are 90 letters on a variety of subjects (in case you did not read the preface), so "hang on" before your knickers get too twisted    And please do remember, this stuff is good enough for evidence in a court room, not a repeatable experiment in a physics lab (but then again, evolution or man-caused global warming cannot be proven in a lab either, so I'm assuming many of you will at least grant this material the same courtesy you would to those two hypotheses).

Of course, it is OK to comment on each letter as we go along; don't hold comments until you have read the whole thing.  But, I doubt I'll have much to say or respond on anything of substance, since my intent is to let the material stand or fall on it's own; I'm not going to debate it.  I'm just providing the letters so you can have something to ponder that you have perhaps not considered before.

So Y'all, do you want to see more of this, either yay or nay? ... I really would appreciate the feedback.

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

At the end of the day i just want Christians to accept that i dont have to go to hell just because I dont believe that Jesus was the son of God. The pope already said it Mountaineer, so why cant you go along with that? I would declare a truce on Christianity if they would do that. :-)

I can't say that for the same reason a true Christian will not convert to Islam on the threat of death; physical death does not matter in the big scheme of things.  The reason I cannot grant your request is because it is not true based on everything I have studied and read and I'm not going to tell you a lie.  I am not going to tell you something to just to ease your mind in the present that will hurt you severely in the end.  I believe Xan already addressed the Pope's statement - it is not Scriptural, assuming his statement was translated and reported accurately.

... Mountaineer

[doodle]

At the end of the day i just want Christians to accept that i dont have to go to hell just because I dont believe that Jesus was the son of God. The pope already said it Mountaineer, so why cant you go along with that? I would declare a truce on Christianity if they would do that. :-)

I can't say that for the same reason a true Christian will not convert to Islam on the threat of death; physical death does not matter in the big scheme of things.  The reason I cannot grant your request is because it is not true based on everything I have studied and read and I'm not going to tell you a lie.  I am not going to tell you something to just to ease your mind in the present that will hurt you severely in the end.  I believe Xan already addressed the Pope's statement - it is not Scriptural, assuming his statement was translated and reported accurately.

... Mountaineer

I guess you happen to disagree with the pope then....which is another problem with Christianity....nobody can agree on anything.

So why doesn't God just clear this whole mess up by exhibiting himself and explaining what exactly we need to do? I have met some wonderfully enlightened and kind  buddhist monks who are apparently going to hell even though they have shown loving compassion every day of their lives to the best of their ability. Unfortunately they were born in a country without a strong Christian tradition and they grew up with Buddhism. It seems awfully callous for God to send their souls to burn forever without at least making a five minute announcement or something.

[doodle]

Interesting debate and discussion about the topic of the afterlife between two rabbis and two atheists.....unfortunately for these kind, frumpy looking gentlemen, they are all going to burn in hell for eternity.

http://youtu.be/87omFVl_o6k

[doodle]

Just discovered Christopher Hitchens....he is like the Mike Tyson of religious debates....just devastating.

http://youtu.be/KZTzZyloR8w

[Xan]

At the end of the day i just want Christians to accept that i dont have to go to hell just because I dont believe that Jesus was the son of God. The pope already said it Mountaineer, so why cant you go along with that? I would declare a truce on Christianity if they would do that. :-)

I don't believe any church ever has declared that any given individual is in Hell.  (Well, except the Westboro people of course.)  A pastor of mine once granted that it's possible that those who never heard the Gospel could go to heaven, but that God has told us how to participate in the Kingdom, and that we have no business expecting or demanding that He make changes to His promises.

I am curious, though, doodle.  Why does it bother you so much?  Why does it matter to you what somebody else's fairy tale says about you, if it's all bogus anyway?

[doodle]

It makes it difficult to have a close relationship with someone when they think you are going to end up writhing for eternity in hell. I dont believe in Islam, or Judaism, or Christianity but I dont threaten people who do with the idea that if they dont believe as I do that their souls will rot in hell. That is a cruel threat that religion uses to scare people into conversion. It is a fundamentally divisive position that creates unecessary animosity.

Other than that, i dont really care what other peoples beliefs are (completely illogical and unfounded as they might be) unless they somehow negatively impact me.

[Xan]

But, you do go around claiming that reality is ultimately meaningless, that life is nothing other than a random arrangement of atoms, that we'll all die and disappear and nothing really ever matters.  You yourself have pointed out how horrible this is.  To someone who believes in a loving Creator, this sounds just as bad as Hell, because there is simply no hope in that situation.  Are we really so different?  In fact, you bring up your "Hell" frequently; I don't recall anyone ever telling you that you're going to Hell.

[Mountaineer]

It makes it difficult to have a close relationship with someone when they think you are going to end up writhing for eternity in hell. I dont believe in Islam, or Judaism, or Christianity but I dont threaten people who do with the idea that if they dont believe as I do that their souls will rot in hell. That is a cruel threat that religion uses to scare people into conversion. It is a fundamentally divisive position that creates unecessary animosity.

Other than that, i dont really care what other peoples beliefs are (completely illogical and unfounded as they might be) unless they somehow negatively impact me.

doodle, I find your terminology interesting - it seems you are focused on the "stick" approach to Christianity (the Law), where I perceive Xan and I (and probably many others) are more focused on the "carrot" approach (the Gospel).

Regardless, you might find this discussion from 1924 interesting.  Several of your questions/concerns about "hell" and why God does not give all those "good people who do not believe" a free pass are addressed.

http://cuwdigital.cuw.edu/cdm/ref/colle ... pdf/id/394


... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

I am going to start posting a link to a few pages at a time of "What They Need to Hear"  by Klemet Preus.  This is the book I recommended a few posts back. 

The preface to the book is first, the first letter, What is a Miracle, is second.  I would appreciate feedback from you all on whether anyone wishes to read more before I end up copying a lot of material no one wishes to see. 

Preface: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9686c32ul1v1qcg/Preface.pdf

Letter 1: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nz1v2kx6hz6qc ... le%201.pdf

... Mountaineer

Suggestion: If you have not read the first two items (see links in the quoted material above), I suggest you do so prior to reading subsequent Letters.  Each Letter tends to build on prior material.

Here are the links to Letters 2 and 3:

Letter 2: Still Skeptical About Miracles? https://www.dropbox.com/s/krziih5gdq8pm ... les%3F.pdf

Letter 3: Miracles Are Necessary  https://www.dropbox.com/s/prd5170htajyu ... essary.pdf

... Mountaineer

[doodle]

But, you do go around claiming that reality is ultimately meaningless, that life is nothing other than a random arrangement of atoms, that we'll all die and disappear and nothing really ever matters.  You yourself have pointed out how horrible this is.  To someone who believes in a loving Creator, this sounds just as bad as Hell, because there is simply no hope in that situation.  Are we really so different?  In fact, you bring up your "Hell" frequently; I don't recall anyone ever telling you that you're going to Hell.

Which is why man invents the idea of a spirit world and God in order to placate himself....because he is too scared and weak to face the music that he is most probably just star dust. Then some smart people come along and institutionalize a religion and tell people that they are going to go to hell unless they join the religion and tithe over a portion of their earnings every year. And if they have been extra bad they can just pay a little extra money and the church will absolve them of their sins. What a racket! You guys say the government is corrupt, yet the Christian church has to be one of the most morally defunct institutions of extortion that has ever existed.

You have no knowledge about what goes on after death except a horribly written obscure book that you have to read a million and one interpretations of in order to even understand it. When asked for proof about the content of this book you simply refer back to passages in the same book. That is so frustratingly circular that it boggles the mind.

Im sorry, i just cant maintain my composure in this type of discussion. I dont know why all this nonsense bothers me so much, but it does. I need a break from here....

[doodle]

As far as going to hell, Mountaineer has said it on many ocassions....here is one such example:

Do I have homosexual friends?  Sure.  Are they in general "nice" people?  Sure.  Are they doing what is right in their own eyes?  Some say yes, some say no.  Should I love my homosexual friends?  Sure.  Should homosexuals have the same Civil rights as hetrosexuals?  I would think so.  Should I love my hetrosexual friends?  Sure.  Are we all sinners?  You bet ya!  Should I tell my homosexual friends that they are not doing God's will?  Sure.  Should I tell my adulterous hetrosexual friends they are not doing God's will?  Sure.  Are my unrepentant homosexual friends going to Hell?  Yep.  Are my unrepentant hetrosexual adulterous friends going to Hell.  Yep. 

We just have entirely different conceptions of the universe and our place in it. My version of course is a lot more loving and forgiving than your version. You dont get to live an eternal life and listen to boring harp music forever though. My beliefs dont cater to the fragile ego. When you die you simply get reabsorbed back into the universe and become something else. Of course it wont be you anymore, it will be something or someone else in the same way that the chicken i ate for dinner last night is not a chicken anymore, it is now a Doodle. From a materialist point of view i have clear evidence for this.

As far as the spiritual realm none of us has any answers so its best to just shut up and say that you dont know. The fact that religions claim knowledge about something that they dont know (and people actually believe them) is so unbelievably ridiculous that it boggles the mind.

[Kshartle]

he is most probably just star dust........

When asked for proof about the content of this book you simply refer back to passages in the same book. That is so frustratingly circular that it boggles the mind.

I knew a gal named start dust........she seemed to have unresolved issues with her father.

The circular reference is frustrating sure, but the internal contradictions of a perfect and loving being creating imperfect children that he will slam with desires and situations that will cause them to break his rules and then he will use that as justification for roasting them in a lake of fire for all eternity is much worse.

We don't even torture captured child rapists let alone keep them concious and alive for as long as possible while roasting them. Don't be too frustrated Doodle. I dissagee with you on almost everything but I'm glad to agree with you here.    That should always be worth a gold star on the calendar.

[Mountaineer]

As far as going to hell, Mountaineer has said it on many ocassions....here is one such example:

Do I have homosexual friends?  Sure.  Are they in general "nice" people?  Sure.  Are they doing what is right in their own eyes?  Some say yes, some say no.  Should I love my homosexual friends?  Sure.  Should homosexuals have the same Civil rights as hetrosexuals?  I would think so.  Should I love my hetrosexual friends?  Sure.  Are we all sinners?  You bet ya!  Should I tell my homosexual friends that they are not doing God's will?  Sure.  Should I tell my adulterous hetrosexual friends they are not doing God's will?  Sure.  Are my unrepentant homosexual friends going to Hell?  Yep.  Are my unrepentant hetrosexual adulterous friends going to Hell.  Yep. 

doodle,

Actually I never said YOU PERSONALLY are going to Hell (or the place of the dead, or Sheol, or Hades, or Gahenna, or eternal damnation, or eternal torment - whatever you choose to call it it is pretty much the same thing), or if I did, I misspoke.  I don't know if you will receive the gifts of repentance and belief in the promises of Jesus before you croak.  That is God's business. 

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

Suggestion: If you have not read the previous Letters, posted earlier in this thread, I suggest you do so prior to reading subsequent Letters.  Each Letter tends to build on prior material. 

Here are links to the next two letters from "What They Need to Hear".

Letter 4:  Miracles Are Necessary for Us to be Redeemed
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xv6v100m9bc6v ... deemed.pdf

Letter 5:  Virgin Birth
https://www.dropbox.com/s/hnyv2k21v355y ... 0Birth.pdf

... Mountaineer

[moda0306]

As far as going to hell, Mountaineer has said it on many ocassions....here is one such example:

Do I have homosexual friends?  Sure.  Are they in general "nice" people?  Sure.  Are they doing what is right in their own eyes?  Some say yes, some say no.  Should I love my homosexual friends?  Sure.  Should homosexuals have the same Civil rights as hetrosexuals?  I would think so.  Should I love my hetrosexual friends?  Sure.  Are we all sinners?  You bet ya!  Should I tell my homosexual friends that they are not doing God's will?  Sure.  Should I tell my adulterous hetrosexual friends they are not doing God's will?  Sure.  Are my unrepentant homosexual friends going to Hell?  Yep.  Are my unrepentant hetrosexual adulterous friends going to Hell.  Yep. 

doodle,

Actually I never said YOU PERSONALLY are going to Hell (or the place of the dead, or Sheol, or Hades, or Gahenna, or eternal damnation, or eternal torment - whatever you choose to call it it is pretty much the same thing), or if I did, I misspoke.  I don't know if you will receive the gifts of repentance and belief in the promises of Jesus before you croak.  That is God's business. 

... Mountaineer

Mountaineer,

That's just semantics.  Yes, you haven't said doodle is going to hell.

This is like me saying,

"Mountaineer, people who are actively practicing Christianity are going to die via a legitimate Islamic Jihad against them."

And to that you say, "Moda, you're essentially saying I should rightfully die in a Jihad.  It's hard to debate with you.  I'm disgusted by your assumption."

And I said,

"Mountaineer, I never said YOU PERSONALLY are going to die in a legitimate Islamic Jihad.  I don't know if you will receive the gifts of Muhammad's Word and belief in Allah & the Koran before you are visited by one of Allah's Jihadist disciples."



Now, I'm not really offended by your belief that I will go to hell.  What sort of confuses me is the inconsistent "rules" of getting into heaven or hell.  We've been through this a bit, but here are some questions that demand our asking, if your version of Christianity is the correct one...

If a baby who doesn't know ANY religion dies, does he go to hell?

If a Buddhist toddler who has never experienced Christianity dies, does he go to hell?

If belief in Christ as our savior is the standard of getting into heaven, what happened to all the people who died in the years following his Crucifixion that had never heard of him?  What about the people who HAD heard of him, but hadn't had any real chance to explore Christianity before death?


It would be one thing if we were given the "gift of life," only to suffer a bit on earth (I can acknowledge that pain could very well be part of a human existence under a "just God.")  but not anything beyond that.  It is something else, entirely, to give someone the "gift" of life, which could very-well be filled with a very short period of pain before his mamma's "boyfriend" chokes him to death... only to then spend eternity in hell because he didn't "find Jesus" yet, or because Jesus didn't "find him."

I know we've discussed this before, so sorry if I'm re-straw-manning here, but if this is the way God operates, I believe it to be ego-maniacal.  Perhaps a lot of people are not worthy of life, or not necessary worthy of a happy physical life, but holy shit an eternity in hell for not accepting Jesus as your savior?  That's just too much to either believe or side with.  I don't think the humble Jesus that I read and heard stories about would ever be that rigid.

And let's not forget, if God truly is all-knowing and all-powerful, HE has set up all these rules.  It is no accident.  He's not a victim of happenstance here....

Perhaps he attempted to engineer mystery for himself by inventing a conscious species that he can't predict the future of, but this means, in the face of children going to hell and his son having to die for our sins, he decided not to rewrite the rules even a little bit... oh but manipulating reality to speak to Abraham to test him by telling him to kill his son?  That's fair game.  Cause a flood that buries humanity under the sea?  No big deal.  But little Buddhist toddlers dying from disease or natural disaster going to hell for ETERNITY?  Well, "God works in mysterious ways."

Ugh I'm getting pissed again just thinking about it.  Please remind/inform me why my analysis is deeply flawed, because to me it seems logically pretty air-tight.

[moda0306]

he is most probably just star dust........

When asked for proof about the content of this book you simply refer back to passages in the same book. That is so frustratingly circular that it boggles the mind.

I knew a gal named start dust........she seemed to have unresolved issues with her father.

The circular reference is frustrating sure, but the internal contradictions of a perfect and loving being creating imperfect children that he will slam with desires and situations that will cause them to break his rules and then he will use that as justification for roasting them in a lake of fire for all eternity is much worse.

We don't even torture captured child rapists let alone keep them concious and alive for as long as possible while roasting them. Don't be too frustrated Doodle. I dissagee with you on almost everything but I'm glad to agree with you here.    That should always be worth a gold star on the calendar.

If you were to take a Christian woman's child, and torture her for 12 hours before killing her, they would be utterly devastated and scarred at the morally reprehensible nature of that act.

Yet God brings the gift of life to a child in Asia, he grows up to be a good Buddhist kid, and when a God-induced tsunami kills said child, his soul is afraid and tortured in hell.

"Mysterious," or just not true?

[moda0306]

I am going to start posting a link to a few pages at a time of "What They Need to Hear"  by Klemet Preus.  This is the book I recommended a few posts back. 

The preface to the book is first, the first letter, What is a Miracle, is second.  I would appreciate feedback from you all on whether anyone wishes to read more before I end up copying a lot of material no one wishes to see. 

Preface: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9686c32ul1v1qcg/Preface.pdf

Letter 1: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nz1v2kx6hz6qc ... le%201.pdf

... Mountaineer

Suggestion: If you have not read the first two items (see links in the quoted material above), I suggest you do so prior to reading subsequent Letters.  Each Letter tends to build on prior material.

Here are the links to Letters 2 and 3:

Letter 2: Still Skeptical About Miracles? https://www.dropbox.com/s/fmf98c77xtb14 ... F%20L2.pdf

Letter 3: Miracles Are Necessary  https://www.dropbox.com/s/xdiqubocy9vqt ... -%20L3.pdf

... Mountaineer

The author assumes as self-evident premises that the existence of the universe and of life are both impossible "Miracles."  This thing is failing already.  He offers no concrete scientific background of it.  He just states it like it is fact in 1 page.  Like stating "the sky is blue," and "water is wet."

So far I'm really not impressed.

[Kshartle]

Ugh I'm getting pissed again just thinking about it.  Please remind/inform me why my analysis is deeply flawed, because to me it seems logically pretty air-tight.

It is. The internal contradictions are proof that it can't be true.

That's not to say there isn't some powerful being that designed the Earth, shaped the matter, wrote the organic computer programs in our brains and the brains of animals etc. It's just to say that all the religions are nothing more than people stating their unprovable or clearly inccorrect beliefs about matters of fact.

Any argument for God having the right to put me in a firey pit for eternity is an argument that he is the owner of my life and the one responsible for it. How can he have the right to scorch me forever? He must own me or he is just a slave master. I must just be another animal without the right of self-ownership but in that case how can I be responsible for my actions? That's like torturing an animal for as long as you can keep it alive because it acted in accordance with it's nature, and in fact it's an animal that you breed with the foreknowledge you would torture it for as long as you could.

That makes God a 100% sadist/slaver that is beneath the morality of all but the most despicable humans, which is obviously at odds with the Bible, proving the Bible is false.  Belief in it is an emotional defense mechanisim to provide a sense of purpose and direction to people, as well as a hope for their afterlife and some kind of get-out-of-jail free card for their bad behavior here. It's an escape from a morality that they would have to be accountable to themselves. Extinguishing this belief also is very difficult because of family, friends, social circles and the realization that people you've trusted all your lives were wrong or lying to you. It's extremely difficult emotionaly. I know, I went through it!!!

Not that my statement of conversion is an argument for what's correct....that's a fallacious argument.

[Kshartle]

he is most probably just star dust........

When asked for proof about the content of this book you simply refer back to passages in the same book. That is so frustratingly circular that it boggles the mind.

I knew a gal named start dust........she seemed to have unresolved issues with her father.

The circular reference is frustrating sure, but the internal contradictions of a perfect and loving being creating imperfect children that he will slam with desires and situations that will cause them to break his rules and then he will use that as justification for roasting them in a lake of fire for all eternity is much worse.

We don't even torture captured child rapists let alone keep them concious and alive for as long as possible while roasting them. Don't be too frustrated Doodle. I dissagee with you on almost everything but I'm glad to agree with you here.    That should always be worth a gold star on the calendar.

If you were to take a Christian woman's child, and torture her for 12 hours before killing her, they would be utterly devastated and scarred at the morally reprehensible nature of that act.

Yet God brings the gift of life to a child in Asia, he grows up to be a good Buddhist kid, and when a God-induced tsunami kills said child, his soul is afraid and tortured in hell.

"Mysterious," or just not true?

Not true. It's self-contradicting. I love you so much that I must do horrible things to you for ETERNITY.

It can't be true. There are so many other contradictions. "I love you so much that umm.....when someone strikes you give them the other cheek to strike".

If any human father acted like God we would have to resuce the child from that horrible maniac and try to undue the damage done by such an unloving and horrible parent.

[moda0306]

Suggestion: If you have not read the previous Letters, posted earlier in this thread, I suggest you do so prior to reading subsequent Letters.  Each Letter tends to build on prior material. 

Here are links to the next two letters from "What They Need to Hear".

Letter 4:  Miracles Are Necessary for Us to be Redeemed
https://www.dropbox.com/s/aeuse19lpv8qr ... -%20L4.pdf

Letter 5:  Virgin Birth
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6xicivc4qv9uq ... -%20L5.pdf

... Mountaineer

That 5th Letter is really, really poor evidence for the Virgin birth.  He throws a few points of view down from a few MEN as reported by MEN into a BOOK called the Bible.  Not hard evidence.  Just heresy that is thousands of years old.

Basically assuming his conclusions, once again, that the Bible is an accurate account of history... which in some ways it surely may be at times.

Similar to the universe and life, if this is all this guy has for evidence of the virgin birth, I'm woefully unimpressed.  Perhaps there is more later.

Could we fastforward where he doesn't just assume his conclusions within his "analysis," and actually offers up some concrete reference points?  So far, this is NOT good enough for a court of law.