Jesus on a suicide mission

They say Jesus died for our sins. Did God send him on a suicide mission?

February 23rd, 2009 Posted by Insidious | Religion | 15 comments

« Previous | Next »

15 Responses to “Jesus on a suicide mission”

Comment by JiniperZorro | March 22nd, 2009

Not suicide but a loving sacrificial mission. Th only sacrifice that could provide mankind with a means of redemption from the eternal penalty for sin. Basic Christian Theology or any Christian theology 101 will give you a better undersantind.
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:16
Comment by Gavin Quester | April 17th, 2009

So the only way that God could provide mankind with the means for redemption from the “eternal penalty” for sin was to kill his own son?

Isn’t God supposed to be omnipotent? And how does Jesus’ death make up for anyone’s sins?

Does that mean I can go stone a few people to death (for entertainment) then believe in Jesus and have eternal life?

What about the people I stoned to death? If they don’t believe in Jesus before I stone them, they get to perish?

Doesn’t sound very fair, does it?
Comment by Troy Dooly | June 10th, 2009

Gavin,

I know it has been a few weeks since this thread was started, but I just ran across it.

The short answer to your question is… Yes.

However, if you are interested in a serious dialog and not just an asinine argument, I could provide a little deeper answer.

Never Give Up,

Troy
Comment by Gavin Quester | June 11th, 2009

Hi Troy, I’m not sure what gave you the idea that I’m interested in asinine argument. I think people are very inconsistent about the way they discuss religion and politics; pointing it out with some humor seems like an appropriate way to draw people in.

I think it’s humorous that the FOX News crowd, for example, is very critical of Muslim suicide missions and “terrorism” yet they never stop to consider that God sent his “only” son on a suicide mission; never mind that God terrorized several cities with plagues and all kinds of natural disasters, sometimes on account of jealousy, or to fulfill some long-forgotten curse he had punished their ancestors with.

So, yes, I am interested in a deeper answer, if you have one.
Comment by Troy Dooly | June 15th, 2009

Gavin,

As I was re-reading my post, I did come across sounding harsh. Not my intent at all. I come across folks every now and then, who are not really asking thought provoking questions, as much as they are just wanting to get into a spitting contest.

Your response cleared up where you are coming from.

I agree with you whole heatedly that most folks do come across inconsistently about religion, politics, and just about every other controversial subject we could find time to chat about.

Now, I do find your statement on Fox News interesting. Yes, they are very critical of Muslim suicide missions, and “terrorism”, but when you compare Muslim suicide missions, with what Jesus did, I have to disagree. However, my disagreement may in part to my view of this event.

I see God as willing to sacrifice His son Jesus, who (if you believe the story as I do) was willing to agree with His father, that his sacrifice would be the only way to spare the human race from an eternity without a personal relationship with God.

Now unlike the extreme Muslims and other like minded groups (terrorists) who in the name of God not only commit suicide, also kill other people on their self serving mission, and in several cases innocent victims. So respectfully I do not see this as the same type of mission.

You are correct God did “terrorize” not just cities, but whole nations, including his chosen people. However, if we read each event in the context in which it is written, we do see where God gave plenty of chances for people to change and accept Him as the one true God.

And yes, God has been known to be a jealous God, when it comes to people following pagan gods, and not fulfilling their life mission. And admittedly I sometimes scratch my head, wondering why people would decide not to follow God, when they had seen His mighty wrath, and in even more cases his unwavering love.

However, the reality is, that for any of this to even make since we have to realize that when Jesus died on the cross (murdered, suicide or sacrifice), that the old covenant was set aside, and a New Covenant was written, and God made only one command… Accept Jesus as the only only way to have a personal relation with God, then we can live in eternity with Him forever. He did away with all the rules and regulations, that past generations had to live by, and made it clear, that through His grace, we are free from condemnation.

Even, Jesus made it clear “I came so the world might be free, not to condemn the world.”

Going back to your statement above, to many people who call themselves “Christians” want to point fingers at everyone else and condemn them, instead of following Jesus’ example of reaching out to see how He could help.

So, although, I do not fully agree with everything you wrote, you bring up some powerful questions.

In the end, if a person doesn’t have the faith and belief that there really is one true God, who sent his only son, who was sinless, to become “as” sin, to die in the place of mankind, then it really doesn’t matter what others might say.

The really sad thing about this who issue, is not about who is right and who might be wrong, but the fact that since the dawn of time people have died in the name of God from both sides of the story, and how Religious leaders have fallen into the same corruption as all the rest of us common folks do from time to time.

We just in most cases do not have the power to destroy others on such a grand scale.

So in closing, depending on which side of the spectrum one sits, will determine whether they believe God sent Jesus on a suicide or sacrificial mission. Either way Jesus came on His own free will.

Never Give Up,

Troy
Comment by Gavin Quester | June 21st, 2009

“Now, I do find your statement on Fox News interesting. Yes, they are very critical of Muslim suicide missions, and “terrorism”, but when you compare Muslim suicide missions, with what Jesus did, I have to disagree.”

Yeah, it’s a bit of a stretch. They are not really analogous.

“I see God as willing to sacrifice His son Jesus, who (if you believe the story as I do) was willing to agree with His father, that his sacrifice would be the only way to spare the human race from an eternity without a personal relationship with God.”

I don’t believe the story, but I do understand the concept. What I don’t understand is why it’s a sacrifice at all… after all, Jesus would would die (for a total of 3 days), be resurrected and go back to Heaven and God.

In exchange for this 3-day sacrifice, we can all avoid an eternity in hell if we repent for just about any sin? I hate to come across as harsh or disrespectful, but that doesn’t seem very balanced.

“You are correct God did “terrorize” not just cities, but whole nations, including his chosen people. However, if we read each event in the context in which it is written, we do see where God gave plenty of chances for people to change and accept Him as the one true God.”

If that’s the case (that they were warned multiple times) then that’s a little more reasonable. But still, why would an omniscient God be so concerned about people accepting him as the one true God? Isn’t that like the premise in a high-school popularity contest? Bow to me and join my clique, or perish inside your locker for the rest of your high-school life? Seems a little childish.

“And yes, God has been known to be a jealous God, when it comes to people following pagan gods, and not fulfilling their life mission. And admittedly I sometimes scratch my head, wondering why people would decide not to follow God, when they had seen His mighty wrath, and in even more cases his unwavering love.”

And why wouldn’t God just make his existence clear and unambiguous, so that they could follow him? Now, his existence may be obvious to you, but can you blame those to whom His existence is not?

“The really sad thing about this who issue, is not about who is right and who might be wrong, but the fact that since the dawn of time people have died in the name of God from both sides of the story, and how Religious leaders have fallen into the same corruption as all the rest of us common folks do from time to time.”

That is sad.

“So in closing, depending on which side of the spectrum one sits, will determine whether they believe God sent Jesus on a suicide or sacrificial mission. Either way Jesus came on His own free will.”

Thanks for your perspective.

-Gavin.
Comment by Ally | June 24th, 2009

Pretty much Jesus was sent on a suicide mission.
Stop getting all techincal.
How do you know?
“Because the great book says”
How do you know it true?
YOU DONT!
Yes you can believe whatever you want
thats why crazy religious people
NEED to stop JUDGMENTAL! It only
pushes people away.
18% of people that had faith no
longer do.
religion-”something one believes in and follows devotedly”
faith-”belief in anything, as a code of ethics”
ETHICS!!! just do whats right.
No one needs to be told what is right or wrong.

Again, saying one religion is wrong and another is right is very hypocritical! ALL RELIGIONS HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON & THAT IS A NORMAL HUMAN BEING WENT OUT INTO THE WORLD, DISCOVERED SOMETHING NEW ABOUT THEMSELVE, CAME BACK TO SHARE IT WITH PEOPLE.

-ALLY

if you have a comment plz share
lovinfobrock10@yahoo.com
Comment by Peter | August 18th, 2009

Just came across this post. Interesting discussion. Thought I’d add a quick note with regards to the comment:

“And why wouldn’t God just make his existence clear and unambiguous, so that they could follow him? Now, his existence may be obvious to you, but can you blame those to whom His existence is not?”

Good questions.

I would recommend reading two Bible passages that speak directly to these questions:

Romans 1:18 – 24 ( http://bit.ly/mHxZz )

Psalm 19:1-2 ( http://bit.ly/2A3Fom )

- Peter
Comment by Gavin Quester | August 19th, 2009

Romans 1:18-25
The Condemnation of the Unrighteous

1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth by their unrighteousness, 1:19 because what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 1:20 For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made. So people are without excuse. 1:21 For although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God or give him thanks, but they became futile in their thoughts and their senseless hearts were darkened. 1:22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image resembling mortal human beings or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles.

1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the desires of their hearts to impurity, to dishonor their bodies among themselves. 1:25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

According to Romans God made everything and that proves that he exists.

Well, we didn’t see God make everything, and he didn’t sign his name on the trees or in the sky. Being all-powerful that shouldn’t be too hard to do.

We have more useful explanations than “God made everything” for the existence of just about everything.

In other words, Romans doesn’t prove that God made everything. It simply states it.

Psalms 19:1-2
Psalm 19

For the music director; a psalm of David.

19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God;

the sky displays his handiwork.

19:2 Day after day it speaks out;

night after night it reveals his greatness

No. that doesn’t really address the question satisfactorily. Besides, why should we trust the Bible to begin with? Why not go with the Book of Mormon, or a 3rd grade science textbook?
Comment by Peter | August 20th, 2009

Hi Gavin,

You wrote: “In other words, Romans doesn’t prove that God made everything. It simply states it.”

Actually, I think the point of the verses is that if you look at what has been created (the intricacy, the complexity, the beauty, the orderliness of it and that you even have the senses to enjoy and observe all these aspects of it) you can derive sufficient proof of God exists, His eternal power, and divine nature to be without excuse. Whether a person chooses to acknowledge this proof or not is entirely up to them.

You also wrote “Why should we trust the Bible to begin with? Why not go with the Book of Mormon, or a 3rd grade science textbook?”

You may want to refer to the following resource for seriously probing into this question:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t003.html

- Peter
Comment by Gavin Quester | August 20th, 2009

Hi Peter,

I understand what the point of the verse is, but it doesn’t live to its claims. Everyone I know sees that intricacy, complexity and beauty; however, that’s no more proof of the laws of physics than it’s proof of the existence of God.

“you can derive sufficient proof of God exists, His eternal power, and divine nature to be without excuse.”

Has anybody derived this proof?

As for your link showing that we should trust the Bible, what if we used the same logic for any other work of art?

Your link claims that because the Bible is consistent with a few non-metaphysical historical and scientific facts, that we should believe everything in the Bible regarding metaphysics.

That’s a logical fallacy. In fact, there’s a lot more science that came from medieval Islam and the Koran than came from the Bible.

So according to your source, we should in fact choose the Koran as a religious text.
Comment by Dave Whittle | August 20th, 2009

Hi, Gavin – I’ve enjoyed reading this exchange. You ask the kinds of questions I would ask if I hadn’t learned what I’ve learned over the years by studying faith and learning all I could about Jesus Christ and other religions.

And I would answer the questions you’ve answered quite differently than my Christian friends here, not because I think they’re wrong, but because I have a different take on things.

What we (the Evangelicals and Catholics and Protestants and Mormons) all believe in common is that Jesus was the Son of God; our Savior; that he was God made flesh; that he was crucified; and that he rose from the dead; that HE LIVES! and that he is a God of LOVE.

But we accept those things through faith – faith born of a hope for eternal life, through study and prayer and introspection and humble questioning.

But I certainly don’t believe that faith requires us to ignore the truths of science and the way the world is. So I see questions such as yours not as a threat but as an opportunity for me to understand how someone else sees the world. So let me explain my perspective in the hopes that it will inform yours.

We are all spirit children of God. He created this earth for us as a learning and proving ground for us to learn good from evil, and to learn faith. Faith is a principle of power – to act on the basis of what we accept to be true without knowing for a certainty. Example: exploration (whether religious or scientific or geographic) requires faith – namely the belief that there is something we don’t yet know that we can discover. And by that faith, we can then take the action that confirms the truth of what we seek.

So God established this world so that (this is important) each of us has total freedom as to what we choose to believe. God created a world where atheists have as much support for their position, if that’s what they choose to believe, as us believers have for our position that God is real. If God were to remove all doubt, as he surely could, then he would deprive us of our freedom to believe as we choose, and he would deny us the opportunity to exercise faith (without knowledge) and grow in wisdom and power to do good of our own volition.

I’ve just shared in a paragraph what has taken me years to understand, so if it seems incomprehensible, my apologies for trying too hard.

But God has not left us without a basis for our faith. He has given us everything we need: life, our spiritual eyes – our spirit, guidance, inspiration (revelation), and has even given us his word through inspired men (prophets). It’s no coincidence that much of humanity’s earliest known and preserved writings are found in the Bible. But again, even the scriptures can only be understood and accepted by faith. They can not be meant by God to be proof (if they were so intended, they would be as incontrovertable as the shining sun) – instead, they are only evidence for the humble.

So in our journeying here in life, we have guidance from God in the form of our conscience (what we call the Light of Christ), from the word of God (scripture), from prophets (living and dead), and from our inspired brothers and sisters (everyone from Gandhi to Lincoln to MLK to whomever teaches goodness and truth). But in all, we are free to choose what we believe. There is necessarily opposition in all things. If that were not so, there would be no freedom or choice. Without knowing evil, we cannot know good. Without sorrow, there can be no joy. The greater the wisdom in our choices, the greater the joy we achieve. The better we judge between alternatives, the greater the peace of mind we enjoy.

And the most important choice we ever make – the choice that changes everything – is to accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God and our Savior. And the next most important choice we can make is to understand what he taught, or the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I personally found that fullness, in all its enlightening beauty, through The Book of Mormon – Another Testament of Jesus Christ, when I read it at age 17 and had a powerful spiritual witness that it was the word of God, as is the Bible.

But you (and everyone) should decide for themselves.

The one thing I don’t understand is why anyone would not read it in a humble search for the truth. Millions and millions have done exactly that and have come to know that it is true – that no man could have written that book. But again, there is no proof for its veracity – only evidence. Each person must decide for themselves. And I just smile when someone judges it without reading it, or reads it solely to find error. You can find, I’m sure, errors in anything on earth – the Bible, The Book of Mormon, the Constitution, ANYTHING produced by man, whether or not it is inspired by God. God so honors our freedom that he honors our humanity and imperfection. Nothing on Earth, except perhaps elements of virginal nature, is so pure and perfect and flawless that it would deprive critics and unbelievers of fodder for their folly. And to never give the Bible and/or The Book of Mormon a full and honest reading is, quite simply, folly.

But if God has no need to prove anything to you, then certainly I have no need either. I derive great joy from my sure knowledge of the LOVE OF GOD, my family, and my faith. And I’m totally at peace with the simple fact that most others have not chosen to believe as I believe. The brotherhood I enjoy with others who believe as I do, in a unity of the faith, is enough for me. I invite you as my brother to consider the reality of The Book of Mormon as God’s evidence that Jesus is our Savior, that the Bible is the word of God insofar as it has been transcribed and translated correctly, and that the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been restored in these latter days, for the benefit of God’s children.

With yearnings for peace and love towards all,
Dave Whittle
Comment by Gavin Quester | August 20th, 2009

What we (the Evangelicals and Catholics and Protestants and Mormons) all believe in common is that Jesus was the Son of God; our Savior; that he was God made flesh; that he was crucified; and that he rose from the dead; that HE LIVES! and that he is a God of LOVE.

But we accept those things through faith – faith born of a hope for eternal life, through study and prayer and introspection and humble questioning.

But I certainly don’t believe that faith requires us to ignore the truths of science and the way the world is. So I see questions such as yours not as a threat but as an opportunity for me to understand how someone else sees the world. So let me explain my perspective in the hopes that it will inform yours.

We are all spirit children of God. He created this earth for us as a learning and proving ground for us to learn good from evil, and to learn faith. Faith is a principle of power – to act on the basis of what we accept to be true without knowing for a certainty. Example: exploration (whether religious or scientific or geographic) requires faith – namely the belief that there is something we don’t yet know that we can discover. And by that faith, we can then take the action that confirms the truth of what we seek.

What you call faith, here at least, I call probabilities.

So God established this world so that (this is important) each of us has total freedom as to what we choose to believe.

Assuming that’s true, there’s a difference between freedom to believe something, and supplying sources for that “wisdom”. You appear to think they are one and the same.

God created a world where atheists have as much support for their position, if that’s what they choose to believe, as us believers have for our position that God is real.

That seems doubtful, since most of the sources for believers are self-contradictory and inconsistent with reality as God has chosen to present it thus far.

If God were to remove all doubt, as he surely could, then he would deprive us of our freedom to believe as we choose, and he would deny us the opportunity to exercise faith (without knowledge) and grow in wisdom and power to do good of our own volition.

Again, you are confusing the freedom to doubt with the availability of sources to doubt with.

I’ve just shared in a paragraph what has taken me years to understand, so if it seems incomprehensible, my apologies for trying too hard.

I’m fairly sure I understood what you wrote, and appreciate that you chose to share it.

But God has not left us without a basis for our faith. He has given us everything we need: life, our spiritual eyes – our spirit, guidance, inspiration (revelation), and has even given us his word through inspired men (prophets).

That’s really disappointing because self-proclaimed prophets are often the worst evidence against the faith of those same prophets.

It’s no coincidence that much of humanity’s earliest known and preserved writings are found in the Bible. But again, even the scriptures can only be understood and accepted by faith. They can not be meant by God to be proof (if they were so intended, they would be as incontrovertible as the shining sun) – instead, they are only evidence for the humble.

Then, it would be hypocritical for God to condemn any non-believers, since according to you there is no proof, wouldn’t it?

So in our journeying here in life, we have guidance from God in the form of our conscience (what we call the Light of Christ), from the word of God (scripture), from prophets (living and dead), and from our inspired brothers and sisters (everyone from Gandhi to Lincoln to MLK to whomever teaches goodness and truth). But in all, we are free to choose what we believe. There is necessarily opposition in all things. If that were not so, there would be no freedom or choice. Without knowing evil, we cannot know good. Without sorrow, there can be no joy. The greater the wisdom in our choices, the greater the joy we achieve. The better we judge between alternatives, the greater the peace of mind we enjoy.

That opposites exist, does not in any way seem to imply a God or His Plan. In fact, I guess we can’t have God’s existence without his inexistence either.

And the most important choice we ever make – the choice that changes everything – is to accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God and our Savior. And the next most important choice we can make is to understand what he taught, or the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

According to whom?

I personally found that fullness, in all its enlightening beauty, through The Book of Mormon – Another Testament of Jesus Christ, when I read it at age 17 and had a powerful spiritual witness that it was the word of God, as is the Bible.

I found it boring and rather pointless. Pearl of Great Price, on the other hand, that’s interesting.

But you (and everyone) should decide for themselves.

The one thing I don’t understand is why anyone would not read it in a humble search for the truth.

Me neither.

Millions and millions have done exactly that and have come to know that it is true – that no man could have written that book.

How so? Writing a book like that isn’t that hard. Especially with a copy of the Bible nearby.

But again, there is no proof for its veracity – only evidence. Each person must decide for themselves. And I just smile when someone judges it without reading it, or reads it solely to find error. You can find, I’m sure, errors in anything on earth – the Bible, The Book of Mormon, the Constitution, ANYTHING produced by man, whether or not it is inspired by God. God so honors our freedom that he honors our humanity and imperfection. Nothing on Earth, except perhaps elements of virginal nature, is so pure and perfect and flawless that it would deprive critics and unbelievers of fodder for their folly. And to never give the Bible and/or The Book of Mormon a full and honest reading is, quite simply, folly.

What do you think of people who read both and gave them an honest reading, and still believe The Book of Mormon is a fabrication, and the Bible is a set of mythological writings inspired not by God but by a need to find order in the world?

But if God has no need to prove anything to you, then certainly I have no need either.

I’m not sure what that means.

I derive great joy from my sure knowledge of the LOVE OF GOD, my family, and my faith. And I’m totally at peace with the simple fact that most others have not chosen to believe as I believe. The brotherhood I enjoy with others who believe as I do, in a unity of the faith, is enough for me.

I know a lot of Mormons who think the brotherhood (irrespective of the faith) is enough, who have also told me that they’d be lying if they claimed they didn’t have frequent doubts about the veracity of their religion, and about the existence of God.

I invite you as my brother to consider the reality of The Book of Mormon as God’s evidence that Jesus is our Savior, that the Bible is the word of God insofar as it has been transcribed and translated correctly, and that the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been restored in these latter days, for the benefit of God’s children.

I thank you for the invitation, but I’ve already considered all that many times. I keep an open mind, but the more I consider it, the less I believe it. After a while, if you are like me, you realize that the same patterns that lead you to believe that Catholicism is wrong, also present themselves when you consider Mormonism, and many other religions.

If there is no strong evidence that there is an afterlife, then spending too much time on these texts could jeopardize the seemingly short time we have to enjoy life. That said, I encourage others with doubts to follow your suggestion.
Comment by Dave Whittle | August 20th, 2009

Oops – that last post didn’t turn out, and I don’t know how to edit it. Here it is again:

—–
What you call faith, here at least, I call probabilities.
—–

We are limited by language here; I could write a treatise on faith and still not be understood by an unbeliever. Suffice it to say that if you call it “probabilities,” then you have just rendered my whole point worthless, because my definition of faith is recursive: it presupposes that faith has no power unless it is a belief in that which is TRUE. So as I understand faith, a belief in a falsehood is not faith. I recognize that the understanding of faith we Mormons have is different from everyone elses.

—-
… there’s a difference between freedom to believe something, and supplying sources for that “wisdom”. You appear to think they are one and the same.
—-

I have countless sources for my beliefs. I’ve spent over 12,000 hours, by a conservative calculation, of intense and thoughtful study of the Bible, The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine & Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, biographies and histories of Joseph Smith, anti-Mormon literature, other sacred texts, Mormon history, atheistic claims, science, philosophy, and more. I am pretty well informed about these things, but all my study leads me to a confidence that no one side to any debate about these things can claim a superior and more defensible position. I certainly don’t. I simply have chosen to believe the position that has, for me, the greatest explanatory power and offers the greatest happiness.

—-
That seems doubtful, since most of the sources for believers are self-contradictory and inconsistent with reality as God has chosen to present it thus far.
—-

There is a wide range of sources for believers, many of which are indeed self-contradictory and inconsistent: from an uninformed perspective, at least. There is at least as much self-contradiction and inconsistency in our current scientific understanding and theories. Read “13 Things That Don’t Make Sense” and tell me what you think. Again, it’s all what you choose to believe, not that anyone has a valid claim to know more than others. There are geniuses who believe and ignoramuses who believe. There are geniuses who are atheists and idiots who are atheists. Anyone who proclaims superior knowledge is both arrogant and ignorant. I have two degrees and qualify for Mensa with an IQ of 160 – but all that’s truly good for IMO is silencing morons who think that intelligence is the trump card in any discussion. It’s not. Again, God literally created this world so that little is provable so we can choose to believe what we want to believe. And those who choose to believe the truth have an advantage both in this life and the life to come. Those who choose to believe in the deceptions and lies of evil are disadvantaged. It’s that simple.

—-
self-proclaimed prophets are often the worst evidence against the faith of those same prophets.
—-

The existence of fools gold in no way renders genuine gold worthless. Again, you choose whom to believe, and you live with the consequences of your choice.

—–
Then, it would be hypocritical for God to condemn any non-believers, since according to you there is no proof, wouldn’t it?
—–

In my belief system, God condemns no one. They condemn themselves as they choose for themselves, just as someone who never reads or studies condemns themselves to ignorance and lack of opportunity. Similarly, those who ignore or misjudge evidence and witnesses and confuse evil for good and good for evil condemn themselves by their own choices. No one will be condemned by God – all will recognize his love and mercy.

—-
That opposites exist, does not in any way seem to imply a God or His Plan.
—-

I didn’t say that it did. You still think I’m trying to prove that God exists. I’m not. You get to decide that for yourself.

—-
In fact, I guess we can’t have God’s existence without his inexistence either.
—-

No, we can’t have God’s existence (perfect good) without the existence of Satan (perfect evil). “Each truth is independent in the sphere in which it is placed” – which means that God’s existence stands alone in its own dimension, but that on Earth, now, it cannot be proven one way or another, as decreed by God.

—-
According to whom?
—-

I said it, so it’s according to me. But I believe I have scriptural support for that assertion.

—-
I found it boring and rather pointless. Pearl of Great Price, on the other hand, that’s interesting.
—-

So how long did it take you to read it? I’m guessing you probably didn’t even make it past Nephi quoting Isaiah.

—-
How so? Writing a book like that isn’t that hard. Especially with a copy of the Bible nearby.
—-

RotF,L! That’s just risible. You betray your lack of serious contemplation of the book. That’s like saying that Einstein’s Theory of Relativity could be written by a high schooler with access to an encyclopedia. Go ahead and write one like it, if you think it’s so easy. But be forewarned, to write a book like The Book of Mormon, remember that you must (with a hat tip to Hugh B. Brown):
1) write a book that inspires millions of people to make enormous sacrifices for the faith which your book inspires,
2) devise a sacred history of Ancient America that cannot be disproven and which is not inconsistent with archaelogical evidence that arises for hundreds of years to come,
3) write in as many different styles as you claim authors for the book,
4) include little-known ancient Hebrew idioms (e.g. “firm as a valley”) and poetic styles (such as chiasmus) in your book, that are rarely or never used in English writings or literature,
5) be no more than 25 years old, with only a few years of formal education, with no libraries available to research your book,
6) over a period of only a year, dictate your 500+page book (over 300,000 words of logically consistent prose) in a verbal stream to 3rd parties without review and with only minor modifications to wording and punctuation,
7) create a history that narrates new religious ideas, complex political intrigue, relates stories entirely consistent with human nature that shows a wisdom far beyond your 23 years, and integrates sociology, economics, culture, and sacred and secular history and covers a journey from Jerusalem to the New World before it was deemed possible,
recite about a dozen chapters of the Book of Isaiah from memory to those 3rd parties, making only those changes to the text of the Bible that can be justified by Bible scholars,
9) claim that the Book was given to you by an angel on plates of gold (which were unheard of at the time), and then ask other honorable men to write an affadivit that they saw the angel and the golden plates, and 8 men say they saw and held the golden plates, and then have all eleven testimonies remain unimpeached – even after your death, and the deaths of all eleven. Even though some of the eleven leave the church you form and proclaim you a “fallen prophet,” they must never recant their testimony of the angel, the plates, or the truthfulness of the book you write. All 11 must remain honorable, reputable men (attorneys, teachers, farmers, etc.) until their deaths.
10) make the claim that Christ appeared in the Ancient Americas, consistent with Mayan, Incan, and Pacific island legends,
11) fulfill with the coming forth of your book numerous Biblical prophecies,
12) gain little money from your book, but instead persuade a farmer to mortgage his farm to publish your book. You must then lose all you have for it.
13) get thousands of notable men and women, intellectual giants, and scholars over the coming hundred and more years after your death to accept your history and its teachings, and over 100,000 young men and women must belief it to the point that they will gladly sacrifice two years of their lives to “sell” your book to others,
14) substantiate your claims by defending yourself in trial after trial against false charges, even though you are never convicted.
15) watch as believers in your book are persecuted and driven from their homes time and again. You must witness their sufferings, their starvation, their illnesses, and their being murdered – all because they believe you to be a Prophet of God.
16) ultimately, at the age of 38, seal your testimony concerning your books origins with your blood, dying a martyr’s death at the hands of unbelievers.

That’s all a piece of cake, right? Surely you have the intellectual honesty to admit that writing such a book is, if not evidence of divine intervention, an extraordinary accomplishment.

—-
What do you think of people who read both and gave them an honest reading, and still believe The Book of Mormon is a fabrication, and the Bible is a set of mythological writings inspired not by God but by a need to find order in the world? —-

I think they have a different definition of “honest reading” than I do. I have a basic understanding of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, but I’ve never given it an “honest reading,” because it’s too far above my head. Same thing here. To give The Book of Mormon or the Bible an “honest reading” takes a humble heart and an open mind.

—-
I know a lot of Mormons who think the brotherhood (irrespective of the faith) is enough, who have also told me that they’d be lying if they claimed they didn’t have frequent doubts about the veracity of their religion, and about the existence of God.
—-

Well, that’s hearsay, so I can’t speak to what you say. I know I entertain “doubt” (not in the sense you’re thinking, though) regularly because that’s what we’re supposed to do – “prove all things; hold fast to that which is true.” There is a lot I don’t know yet – about science, about history, about the future, etc. etc. etc. All of that falls into the area of “doubt” and ignorance, and I seek to learn more about those areas.

But as for the existence of God, I have no doubt whatsoever. I don’t need to look at the sun to know it’s there. I don’t need to see love to know it exists. I don’t need to visit space to know the view is beautiful. But I wouldn’t know with such certainty now unless I first had faith when I was younger. “You receive no witness until after the trial of your faith.”

—-
I keep an open mind, but the more I consider it, the less I believe it.
—-

You have decided what you will believe, and I can respect that. What I don’t respect is the arrogance that might lead you to say that your decision is any more valid than mine.
You make your choices and live with the consequences, just like I do.

—-
After a while, if you are like me, you realize that the same patterns that lead you to believe that Catholicism is wrong, also present themselves when you consider Mormonism, and many other religions.
—-

Then I’m not like you. What you see as patterns I see reflections. I prefer to see Catholicism as sharing many wonderful truths with us Mormons. I see Catholics as friends and neighbors who have more in common with us Mormons than we have differences. We should all focus more on what we have in common than what we cannot agree on. To me, that’s the essence of humility and peace: a focus on what we can share and should share.

So I won’t keep going around with you covering ground already covered. I’ve offered my precious perspectives to you, and you’re free to reject some or all of them, as you apparently have. I’ve learned a little from you, and perhaps you a little from me. No hard feelings.

All the best,
Dave Whittle
Comment by Gavin Quester | September 15th, 2009

Dave, I consider myself an agnostic atheist. I think there is much more support for atheism than for the common beliefs in Christianity or any of the major religions.

If you want to convince people logically, I highly recommend
The Theist’s Guide to Converting Atheists
What would convince an atheist that a religion is true?