How I see it (part 4)

This is the last segment of this series.

So why is it that some people have to tout these stories as absolutely true, instead of a possible 40-chapter parable? And who told them these stories were true to begin with? And what basis did that person give for them being true?

The main issue that I have with people who want to pronounce things as absolute truth is that they are doing so using the material in question as the authority of it's validity.

People say the Bible is true because God wrote it through man. How do we know that? Because in the Bible, it is written that these words were inspired by God, and thus are true.

That's circular logic, and being a programmer I cannot accept that.

Then there is the chronology of Jesus. Now, I'm not so bold as to claim that no one ever existed named Jesus - I am inclined to believe that the stories about his life were embellished over time. Consider the "man to legend" of common-day individuals: all the Chuck Norris jokes, the stories surrounding those who fought in the Alamo, or those that lived in the American Frontier. Those people haven't been around nearly as long as Jesus' legacy has, yet they are already attributed fantastic feats.

If one portion of the Bible is to be taken figuratively because "that was the writing style of the time," then it would follow that all books in either Testament of the Bible were meant to be taken as figuratively or literally as any of their adjacent books, because they were all written around the same time.

In conjunction with that, is the fact that written records were few and far between. And the finding of the dead-sea scrolls merely indicates that there was a point in which the stories were written down - but up until that point, they were passed down generation to generation by those charged with maintaining the historical folklore.


Then there are the many religions across the world that share the same stories. My reaction to this is that it was because up until Issac and Ishmael, the Middle East followed the same teachings in the Old Testament. After that point, it split. My concern comes up with the similar stories told in different ways, for example the two stories of the Flood of Noah.

Both Flood stories in the Bible vs Koran are similar, except the Koran shows that the flood only covered the known world. The Bible indicates that it covered the *entire* world. Same event, two different tellings - each with different implications.

If the flood covered the whole world, where did the water go? We'd be crushed by the atmospheric pressure if it is all in the sky. If it did not cover the whole world, what else didn't actually happen as described in the bible?

These exaggerated stories make for good examples of the Power of God, but they don't lend credibility to the book they're in when it says one thing happened as described in infallible text, when something else actually happened.

And if it's meant to be a hyperbole to describe some kind of life lesson, then one cannot take that explanation for one story and but revert to a literal translation in other areas where it fits better.


I guess my main concern with all of this is whether or not I want to choose to give up my life - the only one I have - to follow the instructions of one of many religions, with expectations of a reward after death. That's where the Faith part of it all comes into play - whether you choose to believe and have faith that the things you've read in the Bible are true, and will actually take place.

If that were the case, and there weren't so many exaggerations in the stories of the Bible that people get upset about when you counter them with reality, then I probably wouldn't have an issue believing it.

My second concern though, is whether or not I will get to enjoy the "afterlife" period or if my behavior on earth is merely for the reward my soul will get, and I'll have no participatory privileges when the time comes to transition from the physical to spiritual realm.

If I am not going to be aware of the reward or punishment my soul must endure (just as I was not aware of any spiritual existence before birth), then I don't care if it goes to heaven or goes to hell. If I do get to participate in the resulting consequence of my life on earth, then obviously I am strongly inclined to do what it takes to make sure I am on the right side of the pearly gates.

Either way - heaven or not - Jesus says in Matthew 7:13-14

¹³"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. ¹⁴But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

If the gate to heaven is narrow, and only a few will find it, then how crappy it would be to find out you wasted your life on earth avoiding things, and doing other things that you might not have otherwise done, only to find out when you died that you didn't make it on the guest list to heaven? Why do Christians think they are automatically going to heaven when it's clear that only a few will make it?

I think this is one of the more overlooked passages related to Christian lifestyle and the promise of eternal life. Live a good life, live like Jesus, and follow the rules, and *maybe* you'll get into heaven.


I'm not going to deny the existence of Jesus Christ, or the possibility of God, but I think from this point onward, I'm going to live my life as I see fit, and make adjustments where necessary from a logical/physical standpoint. I just don't see it anymore, when it comes to the spiritual realm and things of the supernatural. There is too much reality getting in the way of faith.

As Lewis Black said "I would love to have the faith to believe that the world was created in seven days... but I have thoughts... and that can really f@#$ up the faith thing...."