We live in a world where it’s possible to question the very existence of God, even the supernatural altogether. Our world also contains many religions that, more often than not, tend to break out along ethnic and cultural boundaries. Most of these religions claim to be the one true way to win the “game” of life — whether that’s through reaching enlightenment, receiving salvation, etc.
So for the sake of argument, let’s say that there really is a God, and he’s given us one of these religions that we’re supposed to follow. As most of these religions teach, picking the wrong belief system will result in horrible punishment that is likely to last an eternity. I already see lots of problems with this scenario, but let’s ignore those for the moment.
How are we supposed to know which religion is the true one?
We’re not born with the luxury of knowing about all these religions from a young age. Instead, each of us is raised to believe that one of the options (or none of them) is the truth, so it’s not until we’re adults that we really begin to learn more about the wider world. And at that point, we have a lot of preconceived notions to overcome. But luckily, these religions usually teach that God is a benevolent being that wants every single one of us to find the path to him, so we can reasonably expect that he’ll help us find a way to him.
The most direct way to communicate something to someone is to speak to them directly. So God could choose that method to let us know what he expects of us. If you’re into video games, this is similar to the tutorial dialogs that pop up in your game to let you know the rules. It’s a helpful tool. You can still press whatever buttons you like, but at least you’ll know what’s expected.
Of course, God doesn’t do that for us. Fair enough — what’s another method he could use? Ah, he could send us some kind of “cosmic email” — writing in the sky, or something like that. You know, something that would be nigh impossible for another person to fake. The message would be accompanied by the kind of sign that would give us assurance we’re dealing with the divine. The burning bush, Gideon’s fleece, Paul’s episode on the road to Damascus, etc.
But if God does this kind of thing today, he’s not ubiquitous with it. I’ve never received a sign like that, nor have most people that I’ve ever known. I guess that’s his prerogative, but it does make one question the Bible’s passages that say God is impartial. But I’m starting to digress…
So maybe God could send us some trusted messenger. It would need to be someone that I know well, so I could really trust what they’re saying. But again, I’ve never gotten such a message, and I also know that even well meaning people can sometimes be delusional. I’m not sure I want to risk my soul on such a message delivery system.
So God could send a messenger imbued with divine powers, someone that could work miracles that could only come from God. I would listen to an individual who could do the kinds of miracles that the Bible describes, but I’ve never seen anyone do them.
However, the Bible is a religious text that claims God did use this method a long time ago. Isn’t that just as good as witnessing the miracles for myself? Not for me. Thomas Paine said that once you tell a divine revelation to someone else, it ceases to be revelation and becomes mere hearsay. I have to agree. For me to accept the word of a religious text, the text would have to be incredibly amazing. The writers would have to demonstrate knowledge of things that they couldn’t possibly have known about ahead of time. When events are recounted in multiple places within the text, they must be without error or contradiction. When science is recounted, it must be without error — not simply a regurgitation of what was already known at the time. Its morals must be without reproach. If it gives prophecies, they must be without error.
If those standards seem too high, then maybe you aren’t truly considering what’s at stake. The soul of everyone who has ever lived hinges on the judgments of this God. Each and every soul should be just as precious to him as the souls of your own children are to you. Would you leave the fate of their souls up to chance, or would you do everything within your power to save them from eternal torture (or punishment, or annihilation — whatever your particular flavor teaches)? If you saw a windowless van pull up to your child and watched the driver coax them to come closer, would you stand back to see how your child reacts, or would you run to them as fast as you could, calling them back all the while? You don’t have to answer, because I know what you would do — you’d do what any decent human would do. Why doesn’t God do the same for us? If I’m currently bound for Hell, and I’m influencing my innocent children to eventually follow in my footsteps, why doesn’t God intervene to help us?
And before you say he does just that through scripture, the Bible fails every one of the criteria I listed out. In fact, I’m not aware of any religious text that comes close to meeting those standards. If we accept that God is loving, merciful, and just, then it does not follow that he would be the author of the Bible. I’d be happy to cite specific examples of the Bible’s failings, but I’ve written way too much already. Luckily, I have links to those examples on my home page.
It’s God’s overwhelming hiddenness that sounds the death knell on religion for me. As Delos McKown has said:
The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike.
Finding Truth 
UnkleE, the Christians on Theology Web Forum, and all theists need to understand the following regarding “scholars”:
-there is no such thing as a “scholar of the supernatural”.
-there is no such thing as an “invisible-friend scholar”.
Scholars can tell us what ancient people believed and did. That’s it. They cannot tell us whether or not an invisible friend named Zeus lives on Mt. Olympus or whether or not an invisible friend named Yahweh sits on a golden throne on the edge of the Cosmos. There are no scholars for these concepts.
These are make-believe concepts involving make-believe, invisible god-friends. Invisible god-friends, like all invisible friends, are imaginary. They do not belong to adult reality. Theists need to grow up, and leave their belief in invisible friends in the dust bin of fantasies and superstitions.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I had a Jehovah’s Witness gentleman come to my door a couple of weeks ago. After saying “hello” he tried to hand me some of his literature. I politely declined and said, “We don’t believe in ghosts and other supernatural beings.”
He was at a loss for words.
He finally said, “So when you die, that’s it?”
“Yes.” I replied.
That was the end of the conversation.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I believe that the sooner we non-theists stop giving religion the respectability that it craves the sooner it’s inevitable demise will occur. We can be polite and respectful to the religious while expressing our disdain for their religion (Invisible Friend Belief).
LikeLiked by 1 person
As one of the fastest growing religions, JWs can often be found canvassing the neighbourhood. I tell them about the 144,000 selected out of the approximately 8 million JW members and then ask how many souls do they need to save to become one of the select? While they ponder that for a moment, I tell them they’ll find none here but they have a lot of work before them and not waste their limited time on my doorstep. Strangely enough, I’ve never had the same pair twice. Go figure.
LikeLike
The next time that a group of JW’s show up at my door accompanied by their children (which they frequently do) I fully intend to scold the parents for teaching their children to believe in ghosts and ghouls. I will continue to scold them until they pack up their bibles and Watchtowers and leave.
Religious belief is superstition. It is not something respectable. Educated adults should be ashamed to believe this stuff, just as an older child should be ashamed to admit that he still believes in the Boogeyman.
Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism are NOT about “scholarship”, they are about ancient superstitions. Let’s all do our part to pull back the curtain and expose religion for what it is: a con job of the masses.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Ark
Ah well, you see, it isn’t just religion is it?
Well, actually, no it’s not just a religion. For the majority of Jews it’s more about their culture and ancestry (link) Despite being the religion of the god, God, 68% of Jews feel it is perfectly compatible to be Jewish and NOT believe in God.
LikeLike
@Consoledreader
And are you part of the 68% or the 32%?
Either or, why the Gehenna are you so interested in the shite Newberg is espousing and unkleE is championing?
Especially when you are perfectly aware of the ‘Downside’ to Christianity – and one cannot even marginally ”benefit” from the ”good stuff”(sic) of appealing to a make-believe deity UNLESS one has taken on board the Dark Side: Hell.
It is THIS that is patently hand-waved away with barely an allusion to by both of our esteemed, delusional god-bothers.
And it is because of this that I cannot fathom why you would need to see, in any shape or form, Newberg’ s methodology?
As Hell is an integral part of the pantomime of Praying to Yahweh then what sort of Frakking Dickhead would consider it beneficial?
Just asking.
LikeLike
I mentioned above how Religion craves respectability, as demonstrated by its adherents need to extoll its virtues, such as claiming alleged health benefits. We non-supernaturalists/non-theists need to be at the forefront of demasking Religion; of ripping off the respectable façade of Religion to expose it as the silly superstitious nonsense that it is.
One method to deprive Religion of its respectability is to refuse to address the practitioners of Religion (the clergy) by their lofty religious titles: “Father”, “Pastor”, “Reverend”, or worse, “The Most Reverend”, “His Imminence”, and the daddy of them all “His Holiness”. Refuse to use these labels. Tell those offended that it would be a violation of your conscience to do so. Address these persons simply by their first and last names or use this alternative: Instead of “Reverend” John Doe, use PS John Doe. When asked what “PS” stands for, you can explain: “Practitioner of the Supernatural”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Ark
Does every Christian believe in hell?
LikeLike
@Consoledrader.
Every True Christian ™acknowledges that with a crime there must be punishment. This is justice.
Otherwise what happens to those people – like me and probably you – as you are a Jew- ( 68% or 32%?) the Traditional Christ- Killers dontcha know and without doubt sanctimonious dithering half-wits like unkleE?
What’s left, annihilation? And if not annihilation remain on earth and come back and haunt the grand-kids? FTS!
No, Hell it has to be. Otherwise there is no Heaven and then we would seriously have to ask – What is the frakking point? Why did Jesus come? ( Mary Magdalene always claimed he never did)
Have we been conned all this time? Are the Priests, Pastors, Naughty Nuns, dinosaur hugging Creationists, white-suited evangelical faith healers, Officially Sanctioned Witch hunters, Intellectually-consenusified god-botherers liars or are they simply all off their bloody rockers?
What next? Scientific studies refuting almost scientists who claim the efficacy of prayer?
Good grief!
No Hell is real. It must be. Just like the Triune god, God and the awesomely God-inspired bible and gospels, replete with genocide, slavery, incest murder and mayhem.
Like a fine-tuned universe and pseud cannibalistic behavior praying over crackers and wine is really the body and blood of Jesus so help me god.
Seriously? What next? No Santa?
I can’t take it. Reality is just to difficult don’t you see?
Please pray for me…. I am so confused. I think Satan is whispering in my ear telling me
Newberg is a demon.
Hell not real! Ha! Will you listen to the man.
LikeLike
While most Christians in the U.S. believe in Hell, not all Christians do. (link)
Who most Christians in the U.S. think will end up there versus heaven is also complicated. With small majorities of Christians believing other religions can lead to eternal life besides their own faith. link
As far as my interest in Newberg’s book/research, I’m interested in the topic of religion, particularly the science of religion. That’s all.
LikeLike
Presuming that the science of religion is not an oxymoron and that what we’re really looking at is a study of the <i.effects of religious belief, the Gregory Paul’s work is one of the few that actually investigates, collates, and publishes statistical comparative data on this subject.
Consider:
“Only the least godly democracies enjoy the best overall socioeconomic conditions – as measured by the uniquely comprehensive Successful Societies Scale – in history, the much more Christian US is the most dysfunctional 1st world nation according to major indicators. The primary factor driving the strong correlation between high rates of popular secularism and better societal conditions is the tendency of high levels of economic prosperity and low levels of income disparity and poverty that are created by secular progressive policies to accidentally but consistently suppresses mass religiosity. The religious right tends to oppose effective progressive socioeconomic policies in favor of the socioeconomically Darwinistic dysfunctional policies that favor popular religiosity. No socioeconomically successful and highly religious nation has ever existed, and the antagonistic relationship between benign conditions and the popularity of religion probably make it impossible for one to come into being.” (a href=”http://www.gspaulscienceofreligion.com/”>source)
Of course, actual metadata doesn’t fit with the model that faith is good for the brain; in fact, the data is quite clear in its contrariness to this assertion: higher rates of religiosity correlates to higher rates of social dysfunction… which is the .aggregate of all these functioning brains on the various drugs known as religion.
LikeLike
Notice that I speak of correlates. Here’s an interesting reason why: the direction of effects.
LikeLike
Science of Religion?
Er … what exactly is this?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@unkleE
Something for you …. and Newberg, perhaps.
I wonder what you and Newberg would have to say to these two former Christian women who made the comments?
Personally, unkleE, If it were me, I would suggest that you take your disgusting, immoral Christianity and once and for all stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.
Perhaps the two ladies in question might be a little more tolerant?. Though God(sic) knows why.
LikeLike
Mostly social sciences, including fields such as psychology, sociology, and neurology. One blog that does a good job at commenting on the latest studies is Epiphenom.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Scotties Toy Box and commented:
Well written and well thought out. I wonder the same thing , we get more interacting from far less important beings , so why such a silence from the gods? Great thoughts. Hugs
LikeLike