If an adequate parent couldn't conceive of introducing his or her child to psychopath to test their child's "love", then why would the most loving being in the universe do so?
Hi folks, hope everyone's doing well. I know mentioning the bible can cause friction, so I labeled this thread Mod+ so we can act civilly.
I've been thinking about this for quite some time. A great deal of our cause involves researching and learning from near-death experiences. Living in a very conservative part of the country, I'm familiar with the views of religious fundamentalists, including their views on NDEs. They are not amused, to say it lightly.
I've concluded that what ultimately stands between mainstream science and their acceptance of NDEs is mainstream religion, and what stands between mainstream religion and their acceptance of NDEs is the belief in Satan. To fundamentalists, Satan is everywhere, knows your every thought, and has a near-infinite supply of ammo to drag good people to eternal punishment, including temptation, lies, and even pretending to be Jesus. Therefore, Satan is the enemy, not just to fundamentalists, but to scientists and NDErs as well, as the concept poses the greatest threat to the mainstream acceptance of an unconditionally loving god, reincarnation, NDEs, spirit guides, and other "New Age" notions.
This is my vision: If it could be proven-- and I mean proven, not suggested or implied-- that no such being like Satan exists, there would be nothing-- nothing-- in the fundamentalists' arsenals to suggest NDEs are some deception by an evil being masquerading as a being of light, to pull people away from the "one true path" into eternal damnation. So how do we do this? We go to the source of the concept: The Bible. Not only do we go to the Bible, we go to the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts, and not their modern translations.
The only snag is, I have no idea where to find a copy of the original texts, let alone translate them into modern English, let alone analyze the verses. So can anyone help with this?
I don't think one should waste one's time debating fundamentalists of any kind - they won't change their stance anyway, so the only result of a conversation would be your own distress. How one can challenge the view which is based on nothing but extereme attachment - whether to a particular set of intellectual principles, or a to a concrete social structure, or to a uncritically accepted experiential pattern? Only some truly outstanding event can let these people to break out of their inner prison - simple dialogue is useless.
Just to add: Christian fundamentalists, at least, know the source of their dogma - the (literally understood) Bible. Skeptical/materialistic fundamentalists are devoid even of clear point of reference: they usually appeal to "science", but then they faced the methodologically flawless precognition experiments of Daryl Bem, they demanded that the generally accepted experimental methods Bem used should be abandoned, because they can be used to prove something they disbelieve in. So, their position are not scientific at all - it is some irrational, unverbalized mental addiction which is perceived by the addicts as "self-evident truth" - "truth" so absolute that neither the strongest evidence nor the most valid argumentation can refute it.
Hi again everyone, hope youre all well. I've been giving more thought to my original issue, and I've realized that I cannot prove that a being like Satan does not exist. That there is mention of a devil in the Bible shows that, if nothing else, the idea of Satan exists, and an idea cannot be fully disproven until every facet of the universe is known. An idea, however, can be overshadowed by a better idea.
The idea I have is that, instead of proving that Satan doesn't exist, we instead prove that Satan doesn't have the power to create false experiences and false entities during someone's NDE. If what people experience in an NDE is the real thing and not a deception, it doesn't matter that Satan can't be disproven. It will be shown that NDEs are real, and no religious person will have an argument to dismiss it (except that NDEs are a product of a dying brain, which, in this exercise, we assume they're not).
Here's an example of what I mean. St. Paul wrote that the devil can masquerade as a being of light. So that's one power he supposedly has. Now, if we look at the Bible, Jesus appeared to St. Paul as a being of light when Paul was going to Damascus. Since the book of Acts says specifically it was Jesus, we can assume it was (for the arguments sake), which means Jesus has this power too. So, what's left is to determine what "masquerade" means, and then compare it to the being of light in NDEs to determine if it's real or a masquerading being.
Does this make sense, or am I forgetting something?
I want to say that I'm NOT evangelizing or tring to convert anyone. I just feel that in order to get mainstream science to accept NDEs, mainstream religion needs to accept what Satan can and can't do, meaning we need to communicate in religion's terms, so that entails using the Bible. I do understand that some still won't accept it, but that's their issue.
Thank you for your reply, I agree with you on all counts. The idea, though, isn't primarily to out-debate fundamentalists, but to out-debate my own fears. I have this fear that Satan is real and NDEs are a demonic deception, and it prevents me from fully accepting NDEs as genuine experiences of the afterlife realms. I figured the way to overcome my fear was to prove to myself that Satan was no threat to NDEs, but I wasn't sure how to do that, so I came here so you could help me brainstorm. If I could prove it in such a way that even fundamentalists couldn't argue against it using the same material, then I could overcome that fear and find a way that maybe NDEs could be better accepted among the populace.
I don't think we can prove anything about Satan's capabilities since we don't really know who/what Satan is.
One tack you can take is to recall that everything in the Bible was revealed either through the senses (1 John 1:1) or through altered states of consciousness (visions, dreams, trances). If we cannot trust our senses and we cannot trust revelations in altered states, then it follows that we cannot trust anything in the Bible either; therefore, those who deny the validity of experience in communicating truth undercut the empirical foundation of their faith.
I think someone once said, "the only thing more frightening than 'God is dead' is 'God is insane'". You can approach the Bible with the image of God as an old man in the sky shaking his head in regret that he made man and the angels and gave them free will (such a god is not omnipotent or omniscient) or you can approach the Bible with the image of God as the sovereign omniscient omnipotent watchmaker that guides every atom to its precise location. Both are contradictory and non-nonsensical. It would seem that the God of the universe according to the Bible is at least half insane, which is pretty scary.
I don't think we should try to prove things in order to allay our own fears - though it is good that you can at least acknowledge that is what you are attempting to do. Sometimes reality is scary, but I think learning to accept it is more fruitful than attempting to rationalize it away.
It seems to me that fact and fiction, truth and falsehood interweave and sometimes flow fluidly together. Reality is sensical or nonsensical depending on your perspective. Personally I believe that if you are drawn to truth and goodness and strive for virtuous things, then that is what you will have. I guess I still have some sort of trust in a divine cosmic justice and grace.
I guess for me uncertainty isn't good enough. I feel compelled to discover the truth, but I don't know how. For months I've been praying for God to help me understand Him, but nothing's happened. So I'm fumbling and grasping for straws, and lately I was on this kick about trying to understand Satan, but I realize now that the root of my fears is that I don't understand God: who He is, what He wants, etc. After all, if I know what God wants me to do with my life and how to do it, who cares what Satan can do?
I would say that your real problem is that you are trying to anthropomorphize God.
For me this is partly a question of focus and partly a question of on what level I try to find my answers.
I was brought up in a christian family, and for the first thirty years of my life I considered myself to be a christian. As a christian I came to the conclusion that it is much better for me to focus on God than to focus on whatever might scare me (demons, satan, whatever). I think this is maybe the one thing that I have learned from reading the book of revelation - all sorts of scary stuff happen on Earth but then the focus of the book shifts to heaven and none of those things seem to matter. In the presence of unconditional love everything else seem unimportant... I now would probably shift the word God for love or Life, but I think the same principle applies. Focus on what is good for you and others, and you will find that there is more of this than you would believe focusing on what is bad...
For many years I thought that I could understand who/what God is. I don't believe this anymore. But I do believe that I can experience something I could call God. The same goes for much of what Jesus says in the bible. He often talks about principles that can never fully be understood on the thinking level. Love, trust, acceptance, forgiveness - all of these have to be lived in order to mean anything.
Now I try very much to find my answers through living - on the being level rather than on the thinking level. I've found that there can be a repose and a fulness in just being in the present moment. I've also found (pretty much to my surprise) that I don't have to know what I believe in in order for me to live the principles of love, trust, acceptance or forgiveness.
And those beautiful principles seem to grow when we live them. Somehow there are these feedback loops in life. Make decisions based on fear and you will increase your fear. Make decisions based on trust (for example a trust that everything will work out somehow) and you will increase your trust.
I hope you feel better soon Think With Thoughts.
I could also add that I've come to a similar conclusion on the thinking level as well: love (to wish the best for someone) is my definition of goodness. Lack of love is evil. It doesn't really matter if I'm indifferent or if I hate (or rather: there's a quantatative difference but not a qualatative difference) - it's still lack of love, and every action taken from this standpoint will be destructive.
From this I think it follows naturally that evil is not something to be viewed as equal to goodness. When someone is filled with love, if there was any evil visible in that person before, it simply dissapears. So love can be eternal without evil having to be that. Evil could in from this perspective be viewed as similar to a knot on a hose - when the knot is untied and the water starts running it is as if the knot never was there...
Thank you for your kindness. Yes, the world makes it very hard to focus on the good things in life. Maybe you're right, and God is too big to understand. If that's so, I'm in a jam, because currently I feel spiritually empty, and don't know what to believe about reality, God, and the afterlife. If I can't understand God, I'm not sure how to refill my spiritual cup, because I don't know what I'm looking for.
That's a very interesting metaphor. I'll have to think on that.
If parts of the Bible taken literally are reasonable, are ethical and from loving perspective, then I don't see any reason to throw those out. If other parts aren't like that, best not to be attached to them and explain them away I'd say. Otherwise, taken metaphorically I think it's fine to investigate the Bible as one would a piece of art or an epic poem - because it can tell us much about the nature of man. Also if looked at as an archeological artefact that gives us insight into how our culture/s has evolved to where it is now, it can be extremely useful tool for that. It's clear that the Bible has had a significant impact on our collective condition, our social values, our thinking, even for instance things like science, law, government etc.Hi alkhemst,
I get where you're coming from. The main reason I don't refer to myself as a Christian is because the standard narrative doesn't make sense to me. There are all manner of philosophical and plausibility problems (from my perspective) with mainstream Christianity. On the other hand, it seems to have a lot of truth in it too, as many of my personal experiences, and listening to the testimony of others, lead me to believe. I think Christianity is correct that there are both divine and demonic spiritual forces and entities; I think it is correct that Christ both existed and exists, and that he has both moral and spiritual authority and power. Is he the sole son of God? Is he the sole path to salvation? Did his death on the cross save us all? And how does Christianity relate to other religions, especially in terms of literal truth and exclusivity? These are some tough questions, which I have not yet managed to resolve, even though I keep returning to them. Throwing out all of Christianity because parts of the Bible don't seem to make sense, though, seems foolish to me. Militant atheism in the sense of being aggressively anti-religion, is, in my view, utterly misguided (general comments, I'm not saying this is who you are; I don't know your full position).
Just to add, in regards to there being a different dimension where entities interact with us but not with a material body, I feel there's a good case for that because of OBEs and NDEs. Also certain info by mediums. For example I find the Cassiopean experiment is quite compelling in that regard also the Padgett messages even though they have very different views on the nature of God. Interestingly a lot of the Old Testament was channelled material too, so there's a clear contradiction accepting that but not other forms and explaining this away that channelling outside the Bible must be from this arch-enemy called Satan. How did the OT writers confirm what being they were inspired by back then? To believe the Bible is the be all and end all on such matters is fear based position in my view, so I just feel its more helpful to be open and develop our discernment as we learn.