patrask, ol' Bradbury Board friend. The reason why we know what's on the other side is because Jesus came back from the other side. Did you ever read in scripture what Jesus did while 3 days in the grave? He was busy! One of the things he did was the visit people, dead people, who didn't believe in a Messiah. He went there to bring judgment on them for disbelieving.

"If God be for you, who can be against you?" is a question asked in scripture. It has profound implications of finding life in eternity.

Peering into the ultimate end of someone, requires you better have the exact scriptures to back it up.

Scripture writes that we are not to judge someone. BUT that only applies to those who are NOT Christians. God's judgment always begins with Christians: 1st Peter 4, verse 17.

If it be so difficult for a Christian to be saved, what is the outcome of those who trust in themselves? Or, how can a man save himself if he refuses the hand of God who created him? Scripture asks that.

If you discard scriptures, figure it's all just hooey handed down by common men with over-imaginations, now convoluted by trickle down re-writings thru history, well, then, all you have left is yourself and ...more of yourself!

A child is told not to play in traffic because he'll get killed. God presents laws because we sit on an invisible highway where the enemy of your soul "prowls looking for those he can devour." Your soul is yum-yummy to invisible beasts that have only one way to slap God in the face, and that is to destroy His creation: a human soul.

Getting back to the subject of George Carlin~
~only God knows his heart and mind and soul.

For those who reside in some long forgotten orchard in a vast far away hidden land of no-return, hidden by mountainous hideaways in a far away unknown charting of Earth (can that still be)...and has never heard of Christ...what of them? Well, scripture does address that...

...it says that they are responsible to embrace the "light" that God burns inside of him or her. A person is judged by how they respond to what is intuitively, inherently given to him as a person.

God made everyone to last forever. Thru co-operation with God, a person becomes as God originally designed them, or ultimately broken and shredded likened to a mosaic of ten thousand splintered pieces of glass.

You either believe what it says: Man was made in the image of God.
Or, that man, instead...returned the favor.

_____________________________________________


Note~ for anyone following any of this, I'll fill
in the scriptural references to those statements made
above, when I get the chance during this week.

_____________________________________________

Romans bears out your antepenultimate statement (the Law of God written in their hearts, reference to conscience, etc.).

Here's a question~
Why are there SO many self--proclaimed atheists in the science-fiction field? I remember the shock of the very first science-fiction writer I ever met: Poul Anderson. When I met him I was convinced that this guy had to know a whopping lot about God, because of his writing, the very 'fabric' if you will, of his persona, his thinking, his talent. I will always remember how utterly surprised I was when Poul Anderson said that he didn't believe in God. To this day, I still can't get over it.

Here is a list of only some of the science-fiction writers who consider themselves atheists. Again, how come so many? Tell me: what's the mechanics involved here that deny them the ability to understand the source of their being?

Few of the Science-Fiction/Fantasy writers (living or dead) considered atheists:

Stanislaw Lem
Joe Haldeman
Harlan Ellison
Gene Roddenberry
Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
Algis Budrys
Arthur C. Clarke
Ursula K. LeGuin
Greg Bear
Robert Heinlein
H.P.Lovecraft
Robert Silverberg
Isaac Asimov
Forrest J. Ackerman
David Gerrold

I try to stay out of this discussion, but I think I have an answer to your question, Nard. Two answers actually.

Answer number one:
A lot of atheists are also skeptics, believing that everything should be questioned (including our own beliefs, and the existence or otherwise of God). Science Fiction is, by its very nature, also questioning. To write SF, an author has to be prepared to forget about the real world and imagine possible other worlds. So I see a tendency for atheism/skepticism/questioning to have a natural home in SF.

Answer number two:
Even atheists often have a belief or sense of a higher purpose. Someone (I can't remember who - it might have been Carl Sagan, it might have been Paul Kurtz, or it might have been any number of skepics) has referred to this as the "transcendental temptation". And so it is some of the most atheistic SF writers write fiction that feels rather religious. Arthur C. Clarke often wrote in this vein; Lem sometimes did; Roddenberry often did. Come to think of it, Carl Sagan also wrote an SF novel, Contact, which is one of the most religious SF books to have been written by an atheist.

I'm not saying that SF is only written by atheists, because that clearly isn't the case. I just think there is a natural mutual attraction. (Equally, I can see that my second answer could be an argument for SF being atractive to religious people.)

Finally, did you know: the second issue of The New Ray Bradbury Review (probably to be published in 2009) will explore the theme of "Ray Bradbury and religion"?

Phil~
Yes! I've heard Ray mention he is to write about faith and religion. The tiny little I read was 'right on'. But when I asked him about that little that I read, if this really was his (supposedly)...I never heard back from my faxed question. I think I wrote the passage somewheres online here amidst this plentiful pages of postings. I'll try to re-locate it.

Phil~
The thing is, it is about trying to penetrate thru the intuitive, so to speak, and into the reality of everyday activity we immerse ourselves in every moment. Scripture penetrates the oblique by striking the heart with a sense that what I now see, touch and feel, is reality. It's almost like smelling salts for the heart. It's far more than just faith.

So when I talk to many of these writers of the past, I just can't understand how is it that they don't see thru the 'stuff''. Perhaps I need to re-ask that question to myself. But I think if I had heard it years ago, I would have been captivated by it's amazing propositions . I may not have understood (and I didn't) how to find it as reality, but it certainly would have gotten my attention. (Or was I so far gone I couldn't tell even then? Perhaps!)

quote:

Originally posted by embroiderer:
Doug Spaulding: Saying the bible is not infallible has just put you in the league of skeptics.

Another skeptic:

On Taking the Bible Literally

By Rev. John Martin, U.C.C.

Much as I respect the viewpoint of those who take the Bible literally and regard every work as the "inerrant word of God," there are two reasons why I do not do so.

First, nowhere in the entire Bible is it written that we readers should take the text literally or regard every work as inerrant. (The one possible exception is the warning at the end of Revelation (Rev. 22:18-19, which cautions the reader not to add or to remove any words from this book - the "book" referred to is only the book of Revelation, not the entire Bible.)

Let us also remember that Jesus himself gave us teachings which disagreed with the Bible (there being only the Old Testament in his time), such as when he says, "You've heard it said an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, but I say to you, love your enemies..."

Second, because we Christians regard Jesus as God's ultimate revelation to us, we regard Jesus' teachings as the criterion by which we view the rest of the Bible and judge its teachings. The God revealed by Jesus loves us even more extravagantly than we love our own children. There is no good behavior on our part (such as accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior) which can force God to love us more. There is no behavior on our part (such as not accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior) which can force God to love us less. Just as our love for our children is not dependant on their acceptance or rejection of us. Even when we crucify God's beloved Jesus, God raises Jesus from the dead to let us know that even our worst sin cannot separate us from God's love. Jesus' New (and final) Commandment is that we love one another the way He loves us - which is the forgiving love demonstrated by the Resurrection.

I regard images of God in the Bible which contradict Jesus' revelation of God in the Gospels as inferior revelations at best, and as simply human projections on God at worst. For instance, when God orders Joshua (and later, Saul) to not only capture an enemy town but to kill every man, woman and child in it, we are not dealing with the same God Jesus revealed.

Likewise, in Christian theology whenever we find a theological doctrine contradicting the teachings of Jesus, we need to question that doctrine. For instance, the idea that the violent death of Jesus by crucifixion reconciles God and humanity is a direct contradiction of Jesus' teachings on non-violence.

On the other hand, there are countless passages in the Old Testament (particularly in the Psalms and Prophets) which are in perfect harmony with Jesus' teachings.

To sum up, we will be standing on firm ground both intellectually and devotionally when we read our Bibles, if we remember two things: 1) The Bible never regards itself as inerrant, and 2) Christ is the criterion for judging Biblical images and actions of God.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Doug Spaulding,

Now that was a very interesting post...

THIS IS HILARIOUS!

Someone struck a nerve with Doug Spaulding.

When someone gets provoke, he pulls out his entire family, gets his neighbors out of bed, and rounds up every dog in the vicinity to confront this lightning bug that landed on the fence post.
But I must at least say something. Scripture makes it very clear that mere man DID NOT write the bible. Even Ray Bradbury says he doesn't write his stories. This is NOT metaphor. Ray is convinced he doesn't write his stories.
In scripture it says GOD moved men's minds and hearts and hands. Period! Come on Spaulding. Don't be such a coward now.

quote:

Originally posted by Nard Kordell:
Scripture writes that we are not to judge someone. BUT that only applies to those who are NOT Christians. God's judgment always begins with Christians: 1st Peter 4, verse 17.

It seems as though men seek for the means by which they may condemn: They attempt to circumvent Yeshua's word by putting up conditionals.

And we are told not to hold the word of the law above the spirit of the law.

"I judge no man." John 8:15

What is the spirit of that law?

Then what is the point of saying "do this, and you will be judged; do this, and God will judge you."

I wager that it's not our place to ever say such a thing, even through quotation.

But that is just my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by embroiderer:
THIS IS HILARIOUS!

Actually, I thought the post was very informative. I've been looking for a good reference book detailing the evolution of the early church, during the first few hundred years of its existence. Can anyone recommend a good text, written from a historical perspective, that isn't too dry; that is, which would be very readable from a layman's perspective?

Hmmm, playing devil's advocate again here, it seems to me that an argument stating that "The Bible is divinely inspired and infallible---because it says it is" really would carry no weight whatsoever to one of a sceptical disposition. I don't think one would win any converts with that tack... (I dare say the holy books of all the major religions would make the same claims...)

quote:

Originally posted by theoctobercountry:
Actually, I thought the post was very informative. I've been looking for a good reference book detailing the evolution of the early church, during the first few hundred years of its existence. Can anyone recommend a good text, written from a historical perspective, that isn't too dry; that is, which would be very readable from a layman's perspective?

Thanks.

I would suggest Spong's "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism". With an emphasis on the "mental".

Don't know if it's exactly what you seek, but it's good stuff from a common-sense prospective.

quote:

Originally posted by embroiderer:
THIS IS HILARIOUS!

Thanks.

As Chaplin said, "a day without laughter is a wasted day", so I'm glad I could brighten your day.

(PS: It wasn't meant to be funny.)

You'll excuse me now - I have to put the neighbors back to bed.

quote:

Originally posted by Nico:
They attempt to circumvent Yeshua's word by putting up conditionals.

It's refreshing to hear someone refer to Our Lord by his real name. How many know that Yeshua is properly Anglicized as Joshua, not Jesus.

Now you see what you can learn late in the evening!

(*yawn*)