The message from 'outside' our Universe: The message from the Creator

What is this book called 'The BIBLE'-- claiming to be from the Only 'Real' Creator-God --and WHY is it HERE?

A message from 'outside' our Universe?! What for? Can't I just IGNORE this? Why would I believe this?

[Feb 6, 2024]

This set of documents is my ATTEMPT to distill the claims/message of the "Bible" down, for educated readers who might be (somewhat) unfamiliar with its core claims and message.

This might include:

Adherents of non-Abrahamic religious traditions (including various forms of animism),
Those without ANY strong religious commitments,
Those 'undecided' about such matters--regardless of current beliefs,
Those already having a strong NEGATIVE view of it (perhaps based on misrepresentations of it by others), but who have not PERSONALLY taken a close/careful/honest look at the material themselves, nor having worked through a reasonably-clear (hopefully...sigh), reasoned explanation of it,
And -- especially (sigh) -- those with a "non-Christian" background/experience/worldview, but who are being 'pressured' by good-hearted, well-meaning Christian friends/family to 'trust Jesus'-- but without ANYONE actually PRESENTING a logical/rational CASE for making such a switch (assuming it REQUIRES such a 'switch'-- SOME non-religious or 'less-religious' philosophical paths or meditative practices might not need 'abandoning' at all, but maybe only some 'de-theism-izing' or 'RE-theism-izing').
When these family/friends try to persuade/encourage this acceptance, they often-but-unfortunately lapse into plenty of religious 'buzzwords' and bible verses [assuming they were raised in some "Western-culture" type of religious environment], too often not knowing enough about the other's 'starting point' (i.e., current background/experience/position). So--unfortunately--in their eagerness to help, they often generate MORE confusion instead of MORE clarity (and probably, more 'pressure').
So, hopefully, this material will allow someone to step-back from that, and in a private-quiet setting, listen to a step-by-step, from the ground-up, presentation of the logic/reasoning/facts that DOES ACTUALLY GROUND their core belief system, but of which they are perhaps unaware or unable to articulate it themselves.
You may have to 'de-numb' yourself for this examination, though, since co-existence with friends/family in such a setting often requires PUTTING UP INTERNAL WALLS to their often 'reminders' and/or appeals about the subject. These appeals/reminders can come 'wrapped' in emotional expressions: warm/positive ones (if the friend/family member has a vibrant, working relationship with the Living God) or cold/negative ones (if the friend/family member does not, but is only/merely what is called a 'cultural Christian'). For many readers, this will be uncomfortable, and over time, even the HEARING/READING of 'bible words' (like below) can trigger a person to 'RAISE THE WALLS' and miss the gentleness, goodness, and life-energy in the message in front of them.
And--in a similar fashion--if you start the examination process, and then ASK THEM A QUESTION ABOUT SOMETHING, you sometimes 'trigger' a MORE INVASIVE EFFORT on their part (lol) to 'accelerate' the process... sigh/smile. Good hearts, who care for you, but have little background themselves in such matters. [A little like therapy--we want to help our loved ones--but just do not have the training/tools for that. So, we sometimes do more harm than good. I know this from personal experience, sadly.]
These documents might also serve as a 'refresher', for those who have already processed much of this material in the past.]

Warning ONE (sigh): I will be using awkward, semi-pedantic, overly-verbose, borderline-metaphorical, 'analogically inventive' terminology in much of this material, but the readership at this site--secular skeptics, educated 'truth seekers' and 'undecideds', and critical Christian thinkers-- should be able to process it, and get the gist/nuances of my 'tortured prose' (as one reader labeled it DECADES ago)...

But, of course, it is a LONG series (sigh), but I am just trying to be complete enough (for evaluation) to satisfy the intellectual needs of such readers. But an old proverb warns about deciding BEFORE finishing it (lol):

"If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame."

or a more modern rendition:

"Whoever gives an answer BEFORE he listens is stupid and shameful." (not MY translation, though...smile)

Warning TWO (sigh): I wish there were a 'softer' way to present this material, friends, but I do not know of one, given the inescapable 'challenge' and 'confrontation' nature of this. This NEEDS to be see in all its stark clarity and incisive force, so please understand that it is out of respect and warmth that I even RISK the equally 'inescapable' rebukes and denigrations that this will no doubt 'earn' me... sigh/smile. And my use of ALL CAPS at places are for emphasis (when bold or italic might be less effective) and not me YELLING AT YOU (as one person accused me of years ago...). Ditto for use of COLOR -- trying to help the reader with navigation of the materials.

Additionally, I considered mentioning that 'humility' might be a pre-requisite to examining this, but that is the wrong category. HUMILITY might be needed when in the presence of a person, but it would be HONESTY that is needed when evaluating controversial material, which might shake one's confidence and/or comfort. Arrogance can be destructive, in dealing with challenging content, as one proverb says: "Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."
________________________________________________________________

This is necessarily in two DISTINCT parts:

Part One [This document] -- Do we have to take these claims seriously (both those of the BOOK itself and of the Central Character of the BOOK?
Part Two -- What/Where/How is there even such a book, found in our history?

________________________________________________________________

What does a 'Bible' look like, if you have never seen/looked at one closely?

[Many of you will find this repetitive or too elementary, but I need to level-set this for a wide range of background.]
If you walk into a public library in much of the modern world (where this is allowed...sigh), you will likely find at least one bound book in the Religion/Philosophy section, with the tile "The Bible" (in the native and/or secondary languages of the area).
There may be several volumes with some subset of the content of the fuller/larger Bible (e.g. The Hebrew Bible, The Bible of the Samaritans) and/or special versions (e.g. The Bible in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest Syriac Bible) around it, but there will likely be one that can be identified as 'Judeo-Christian'.
This can be verified by a look at the Table of Contents (TOC).
If you find at least 66 entries in the TOC, it is likely the Bible I am referring too in this discussion. Some of the entries would look like parts of a divided unit. In other words, some of the entries would look like this: "First ABC" or "Third DEF"-- indicating that they were somehow connected to other entries (e.g. same human author, same addressee). And sometimes they may be collapsed into one TOC entry (e.g. "First and Second ABC").
The TOC would typically be divided into two main sections, with at least 39 of those entries in a section often labeled "The Old Testament", and 27 of the entries in a section labeled "The New Testament".
The Old Testament part would comprise about 4/5ths of the whole book, with the New Testament the remaining 1/5th.
The writings listed under "The Old Testament" (henceforth abbreviated "OT") would have been written in the time period referred to as "B.C.E." [Before the Common Era] also referred to as "B.C." or "BC" [Before Christ], originally in the ancient Hebrew language, with parts in the related language of Aramaic.
The OT would be comprised of 3 major groups of writings:
1. writings which are historical in genre, but containing large amounts of material claiming to be from the 'Outside';
2. writings which are composed of 'occasional' materials--proverbs, songs, teaching lectures, etc; and
3. writings which originated with the words and actions of figures known as 'prophets', claiming to speak for God, about current situations (mostly about abuses!) and about possible future situations/consequences.
In the bibles of use in non-messianic Judaism today, there would only be the OT (obviously), but the entries would typically be in a different TOC order-- that which was in use during the earthly lifetime of Jesus/Christ (from whom 'Christianity' derives its name), and throughout the period in which The New Testament appeared.
The terminology in use at the time (which will show up in our discussion below) is important to note:
1. "The Law" (Torah) / "The Law of Moses" / "The Book of Moses" / "The Book of the Law"-- this could be used broadly of the entire OT, but when directly linked with the words 'Moses' or 'Book', was specifically a designation of the first five TOC entries, beginning with the TOC-entry "Genesis". These 5 works described the creation of the universe, earth, and life; the entrance of dissonance and dissolution into our human history, the initial giving of the first 'outside' messages to humans, and the creation of the Israelite community. It contained the first written Contract (treaty, covenant--and its legal testament) between the Creator and humans, which included the well-known 'Ten Commandments'. It also provided the first PROMISES and INTIMATIONS of a future powerful-yet-gentle leader, who would be instrumental in God's provision of a remedy for the now-embedded and constantly increasing dissonance and dissolution.
2. "The Writings" -- this normally referred to those 'spontaneous' or teaching works (i.e., Psalms--a collection of poems, prayers, and songs; Proverbs -- a collection of wise-sayings, riddles, and pragmatic observations/advice; and other literary works); But this could also be used generally to include the other historical accounts of the period AFTER the period of the "LAW", and could also be designated by the shorter term "Psalms". Several of the Psalms had oddly 'foreshadowing' images and several had explicit announcements of future events involving the leader previously mentioned in the Law.
3. "The Prophets" -- this was a specific reference to those writings associated with the major figures who 'spoke for God' in the ancient Israelite community (e.g., rebuking elites for oppression, warning the nation of impending invocation of the 'penalty clauses' of the Contract, exhortations to embrace/invoke the good help of the God of the Contract, calls to the community to honor the Contract stipulations). But this term could also be used broadly, of the prophets PLUS the 'Writings' etc. As dissonance and dissolution increased-- especially within the community in contract with God, more and more announcements and descriptions of the promised leader were recorded-- enough to create some methods of identifying such a figure in the future.
4. "The Law and the Prophets" -- was another way of referring to the entire OT, and was understood to include 'The Writings".
5. "Moses" -- could be used as a reference to the LAW (first 5 books in the TOC) since Moses was accepted as being the main person who recorded the messages of God and the interactions of God with the people (in accordance with the Contract).
6. "it is Written" and "have you not READ" -- This terminology is used when appealing to AUTHORITATIVE writings (like an appeal to a legal document), and is only used when appealing to passages in the Law, the Prophets, and/or the Writings.
7. "The Scriptures" -- referred to ALL the OT books as a whole, and they were understood by the community as having being orchestrated by the one God, and therefore having one, unified 'voice'--expressed in many different forms and genres, and given in many different situations of need.
  The central character in the writings AFTER the OT (The New Testament) -- Jesus/Christ, --succinctly and authoritatively states this:
  "And the Father [God] who sent me [Jesus/Christ] has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen, and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent. You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." [The New Testament, The Gospel of John, Chapter 5, verses 37-40.]
The writings listed under "The New Testament" (henceforth abbreviated "NT") would belong to the period "C.E." [Common Era], also referred to as "A.D." or "AD" [Anno Domini, 'Year of the Lord", referring to one early dating of the birth of its central character/focus: Jesus/Christ], and would have originally been written in the popular-version of ancient Greek, as encouraged and promulgated by Alexander the Great.
Two important sub-sets of the NT we will refer to below, will be
- THE GOSPELS (4 separate TOC entries of type 'Gospel of XYZ', selective, complementary, partial narratives of the public life and death of their central figure-- Jesus, from the town of Nazareth in what was then northern Israel.
- THE LETTERS (aka 'epistles') of the first major emissaries of Jesus, written to specific individuals or groups of his followers about His teachings and work (21 TOC entries, of type "Letter/epistle of XYZ to ABC"). The main letter-authors we will use for data below will be called by the English renderings of their original Greek or Hebrew names: James, John, Paul, Peter.
- [There are other entries in the NT than these, but not in the two specific sub-groups above.]
There may be other religious writings included in the physical book, as allowed by certain religious groups/publishers, but these 66 writings/works will form the core of any full bible, as being PRIMARY SOURCES.
METHOD OF CITATION: Just as there are standard ways of citing sources for passages in modern writing (e.g. Title, Author, Publication Data, Page numbers), citations of passages from these entries use a basic format. Page numbers have little meaning/usefulness in ancient manuscripts (generally), and scholars over the centuries have divided ancient works into CHAPTERS and VERSES, which are largely preserved in translations.
The bible -- as an ancient work -- is cited in this manner, too, using some version of the form TITLE, CHAPTER, VERSE-- with TITLE sometimes containing an author's name .
So, for example, the 12th verse of the 2nd chapter, of the 2nd letter of Paul (the emissary/apostle) to the Thessalonians (i.e. the group of early followers of Jesus in the region of Thessalonica in ancient Greece) might be cited as "2nd Thess. 2:12" or "Paul's Second Letter to the Thessalonians, 2.12".
The letters could also be called just 'book of' -- "Book of Ephesians, 1:2-5" would be equivalent to "Letter of Paul the Apostle to the Church at Ephesus, chapter one, verses two through 5".
Similarly, the 3rd verse of the 19th chapter of the Gospel of John, might be cited as "John 19:3" or "The Gospel of John, 19.3".
The THREE LETTERs by the same author (John) could be cited as "1st John", "2nd Letter of John", and/or "Third Epistle of John" -- followed by a chapter-and-verse indicator (2:11 or 2.11) or just a verse indicator (when there is only one chapter--e.g. 3rd John 4 == the FOURTH verse in the solo/only chapter in the 3rd letter of John).

________________________________________________________________

First, some statements about its tone, character, how perceived (often), and challenges in experiencing it ...

(This is only a stark/blunt statement, not a defense or detailed explanation. The terminology will sound strange, but I am trying to be as precise as possible. And also remember my 'pre-apology' given in Warning TWO above--please!): This book (Bible) contains explicit and unavoidable claims to be a UNIQUE and URGENT message / communication from a supernatural, unbounded, beneficent, currently undetectable by materialist methods, Agency/Agent/Creator/"God"/"The Lord" [Note 1] to humanity. [The designation "The Lord" being used in a governmental authority sense, mostly by the Israelite community under 'contract' with God, and so many of the OT citations given below will use this term to refer to this Agency/Agent/Creator/"God".]

This message/book is:

SHOCKING in its claims to be the ONLY reliable/trustworthy source of information about reality because it comes from the ONLY Architect of said reality, i.e., the only Agent with complete knowledge of that reality, and the only Agent not susceptible to deceit about said reality (i.e. the ONLY "real" Agent/God, creator of all other agents/persons and ecosystems),
..........................
Really? Does this book REALLY take such a strong stance against the thousands and thousands of 'rival' deities and sub-deities in all the 'rival' religious traditions?

UNQUESTIONABLY--this CANNOT be avoided or dismissed. Notice how strong the wording is--in "First Person, Singular"(!)-- from just one of the TOC entries (Isaiah):
- "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
- "Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any.”
- "For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!): “I am the LORD, and there is no other
- "And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me. “Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.
- "[F]or I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done,
[Although this will be unsettling/disturbing for MANY, if this claim is true, then there IS a reliable source of information about life, death, and eternity available TO US! And notice that these statements are not of the form "He is the only God", but "God said, I AM the only God"]
..........................
REALISTIC that such strong claims--even though true and critical for human welfare and accepted by many -- will also be met with:
1. scorn,
2. mockery,
3. scoffing,
4. accusations of arrogance and even 'bullying',
5. apathy ("comfortably numb"),
6. dismissal as being a nationalistic wish-myth of some ancient ethno-centric Semitic tribe,
7. dismissal as being a propaganda tool for wanna-be imperialist successors to the Graeco-Roman culture/empire,
8. dismissal as being a media tool for power-hunger religious institutions,
9. trivialization as being some hodge-podge of stories, growing into myths and legends over time,
10. repudiation as being some megalomaniac fantasies of socially-inferior, self-proclaimed 'prophets',
11. vilification as being 'intolerant' or 'narrow-minded' or 'colonialist',
12. all manner of attacks (violent and otherwise), [Calls to mind the words of Socrates, after the jury had condemned him to death: "And yet I know that this plainness of speech makes them hate me, and what is their hatred but a proof that I am speaking the truth "], and
13. all manner of slander and misrepresentation (both intentional and unintentional).
14. And those who DO accept its message and authority can/do respond similarly--when it challenges OUR 'cherished beliefs'...
--this will, thankfully, not cause the message (or the promises within) to be withdrawn by its Good-intentioned Author. [The same responses can/will/did fall upon those who delivered this message in history, and those who currently share the essentials of this message with peers.]
URGENT in its warnings of the catastrophic dangers of BEING WRONG ABOUT CRUCIAL LIFE-OR-DEATH MATTERS.
I does not / will matter as to:
- how sincere,
- how 'religious',
- how altruistic,
- how 'comfortable',
- how logical-sounding,
- how widespread,
- how traditional,
- how culturally approved, or
- how strongly held,
a mistaken belief might be -- it can be fatal, and/or worse-than-fatal.
REALITY IS JUST NOT FLEXIBLE ENOUGH (as known from our PRESENT experience/life), and statements/beliefs about that reality must CONFORM TO IT --i.e. be TRUE -- in order to 'safely' navigate through it.
[I could theoretically convince myself fully that gravity will not apply to me, if I jump off a building, but gravity couldn't care less about how 'sincere' my belief is, or how strongly it is held... We know NOTHING for sure from our PRESENT, pre-mortem existence about what 'forces' might exist in some post-mortem existence plane, but it would NOT be in our best self-interest to ASSUME that they are any more 'flexible' than gravity...!]
BRUTALLY HONEST in its identification of fatal/false beliefs (even when they are mixed in together with true beliefs, as is typically the case in our history and our belief-systems),
DELIBERATELY INVASIVE into our thought lives, when we have become too 'comfortably numb' in our:
1. religious beliefs,
2. philosophical worldview,
3. attitude toward the supernatural,
4. acclaim for altruism,
5. meta-scientific materialism and/or pseudo-scientific naturalism,
6. self-righteousness,
7. visionary status,
8. material success,
9. peer acceptance and social status,
10. disdain/devaluation of those already accepting the message,
11. cultural/ethnic heritage, or
12. pedigree/legacy.
--if to the extent that we are numb to warnings, dull in our sensitivity to danger, or conditioned to ignore 'unsettling' information. [Of course, this applies to those who DO accept its message/authority--it constantly challenges US to be open to hearing its call for change in OUR LIVES.]
INTOLERANT/THREATENING toward those:
1. human persons,
2. spiritual 'teachers',
3. religious traditions,
4. community leaders,
5. cultural forces, and
6. (perhaps) malicious superset agents
--that could/would work against us, to prevent us from learning and accepting these truths (specifically/only the CRUCIAL ones), and

But ALL OF THIS is for our good / to our advantage / uniquely for our benefit! It is:

AUTHORITATIVELY GUARANTEEING a hyper-beneficial outcome, if we simply listen, pay attention, and 'follow the simple directions' given.
[We should note here, though, that even though I am focusing this 'stark' discussion STRICTLY on the issue of the AFTERLIFE, the message contains much more information, explaining issues in THIS LIFE (I personally refer to it as a "Users Guide to Life" (both pre-mortem and post-mortem). Its guidance has kept me out of 'dissonance and dissolution' many, many times!--but that is another story, for another time...]
ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO ACCEPT/BELIEVE its MOTIVE--LOVE/GENEROUSITY?! --- claiming that:
1. The original generation of the superset and subsets were due to PUREST LOVE between Agents 'within' the unitary Agency (e.g., that the creation of this beautiful universe was a 'gift' between Agents 'inside' that unitary Agency), and that
2. This message to us was prompted and initiated out of PUREST LOVE FOR US, from the AGENCY as a whole/unit.
3. [We know no such LOVE/GENEROUSITY from any powerful, authoritative derivative agencies, so it is difficult for us to believe--at first-- that a primal, non-derivative authority of such supreme power would be of such expansive goodness!]
..........................
Love?--Really? That sounds pretty syrupy to me... Pretty sure every religion endorses LOVE, so I don't really find this 'almost impossible to accept'--it is sort of 'standard terms' nowadays.

SADLY, not the CASE. The 'popular' emphasis on "pre-emptive" love ["DO unto others..." versus just "DO NOT unto others..."], on kindness across all social and class status 'tiers', on social justice warranted by equality-of-value, etc. are BY-PRODUCTS of the early counter-culture, transformative Jesus-movement. And are not even HELD by some fully-modern, but deeply-religious societies. The secular/"humanistic" values of much of the modern world (where adopted) are 'borrowed capital' from this biblical message [NOTE 2].
Whereas it is easy (perhaps?) to find statements about love of/for the deity and love for fellow humans in the SECONDARY and DERIVATIVE literature of most THEISTIC religious traditions, it is much more difficult to find strong/frequent statements in the PRIMARY, foundational documents of those traditions.
In contrast, the PRIORITY of this and the CENTRALITY of this in this message is striking and unique, in all the PRIMARY documents:
- Statements about God's love FOR US abound--they were the defining aspect of a relationship with God, initiated BY GOD:
  - “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [Gospel of John 3:16]
  - "But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us" [Book of Ephesians 2.4] God our Father, who loved us and gave us eternal comfort and good hope through grace [2nd Thess 2:16]
  - "In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the remedy for our sins" [1st John 4:10]
  - "We love because he first loved us. [1st John 4:19]
  - "See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God" [1st John 3.1]
  - "For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." [Paul's letter to the Romans 8:38ff]
- Jesus (of the New Testament Gospels) summarizes BOTH aspects of the message given thus far in history, about LOVE FOR GOD:
  “Which commandment is the most important of all?” Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”
- And this priority is consistently emphasized by his emissaries to us:
  1. His emissary (apostle) Peter: "Above all, keep loving one another earnestly..." [1st Peter, chapter 4, verse 8]
  2. His emissary (apostle) John: "Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. [1st John 4:11]
  3. His emissary (apostle) Paul: "So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love. [First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 13:13]
  4. His emissary (apostle) Paul: "above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony [Colossians 3:14]
[There are so many ways to demonstrate the experiential effect of this on those embracing this message-- but that is WAY out-of-scope for THIS presentation... sigh/smile.]
..........................

But I should 'warn you' (sigh/lol), that these characteristics (and possible human responses) will also be descriptive of the CENTRAL CHARACTER of the narratives--this Jesus/Christ.

We will find HIS words and HIS life and HIS claims to ALSO be SHOCKING, REALISTIC, URGENT, BRUTALLY HONEST, DELIBERATELY INVASIVE, and INTOLERANT/THREATENING -- yet also (like the message-media) AUTHORITATIVELY GUARANTEETING a hyper-beneficial outcome and based fully on LOVE/GENEROUSITY.

And when we get to the CONTENTS of his message, we will be THANKFUL for this honesty and invasiveness...

These are NOT the general characteristics of a 'good moral teacher' or a 'great religious leader', so be prepared to discover (below) a portrait of Jesus/Christ SO DIFFERENT from most popular depictions of Him. [But also 'wonderfully different' for us humans!!]

________________________________________________________________

Next, a quick overview of some of its CONTENT statements about our created reality.

This message-document describes our physically-detectable space-time universe as only a subset of a much deeper/expansive reality, and portrays our universe as situated within the "larger" context of a 'spiritual' reality/realm.

[Note: We are stuck with 'container' metaphors for much of this, with the same level of 'intuitive/vague understanding' -- but no really PRECISE definition -- that we have in describing infinite series of numbers "within" other infinite series of numbers, or infinite sets that "contain" other infinite sets.]

This bible/document claims -- in many and varied ways -- to be a communication from this original/primal/ultimate Agency-Agent, revealing important facts we would otherwise not know, and possible dangers we would not be able to foresee.

For starters:

The communication reveals/explains that the original/primal/ultimate Agency-Agent generated the super-set reality.
The communication reveals/explains that the Ultimate Agency-Agent then generated some secondary, derivative, finite, with bounded-autonomy agents in the super-set.
The communication reveals/explains that the Ultimate Agency-Agent then generated our subset astro/cosmic reality (including us humans as finite agents, also with bounded-autonomy).
The communication states that the Ultimate Agency-Agent interacts with us and our astro/cosmic reality, with beneficent intent.
The communication reveals facts about our origins (e.g. features, rationale) and reveals facts about our intended roles (within the subset).
The communication also reveals some limited details about our intended FUTURES (in the larger/elevated superset).
It describes these FUTURES in images of what we call the 'afterlife' or 'post-mortem' experience--currently undetectable and described as irreversible.
It describes these FUTURES as originated from love, and designed in beneficence, and as having variability in intensity, beauty, and joy, capable of being influenced to some degree by ourselves.
The communication explains that some of the 'secondary, derivative, finite, with bounded-autonomy agents' from the super-set are allowed to interact with us.
The communication explains/warns us that not all of these secondary/derivative 'superset' agents are beneficent in their interactions with us, in our astro/cosmic reality.
The communication explains/describes some methods of dealing with these interactions, if/when/as they might occur.

Since most of the above is undetectable (mostly) and/or undiscoverable (currently) using the standard tools we have for learning about our astro/cosmic 'subset' universe, we have NO OTHER SOURCE OF DATA about the superset, if it is not disclosed/revealed to us 'from outside/above/below'.
________________________________________________________________

Does this book REALLY make such EXPLICIT claims?

YES--consistently so...

Its writers and the participants in the narratives represent themselves as messengers or conveyors of different (but related) parts of the message, even recognizing how bizarre their claims may seem to their audiences.

More than 3,800 times the Old Testament writers use the terms, “thus says the Lord,” “the word of the Lord came to” such and such a person, “the Lord said,” or some such equivalent.
The central character of the combined stories [Jesus/Christ, as promised in the OT, and as described in the GOSPELS of the NT] literally claims to be a 'full-peer, inside-member Agent' of this pre-creation Agency/Agent/God/Ultimate Being, coming FROM INSIDE this Being, INTO our subset reality/history, being somehow 'incorporated into' a fully human-life, and provided numerous, consistent, and sustained evidence for this bizarre claim , e.g.:
- unprecedented combination of supernatural/creator-level power and anti-elitist humility;
- supreme authority without even a HINT of megalomania;
- unwavering steadfastness yet a meekness and gentleness known to all;
- full alignment with the OT message and yet absolute moral authority as interpreter of that message.
This character (Jesus who was/is called in Hebrew the 'Messiah' and in Greek the 'Christ', both terms meaning 'anointed one' == 'empowered one' ) repeatedly affirms that the written documents of the bible (as produced up to that point in history, i.e., the Old Testament) was literally a linguistic message ('word') of this Agency/Agent/God (of which He was a full-peer-member-Agent). His references to it and detailed quotes from it, are BASED ON its nature as a linguistic deposit. [Discussed below]
He also repeatedly affirms that the appearing inside history of BOTH the message AND himself was to warn us of a critical post-mortem danger we face, and that his mission in coming into humanity/history was to facilitate a way for us to
1. avoid this post-mortem danger,
2. reduce the effects of the pervasive 'dissonance and dissolution', and
3. even 'optimize' our pre-mortem and post-mortem experiences.
This facilitation involved both some actions/events in/at the intersection of the pre-creation/super-set/subset realities (especially the theological aspects of his birth as a human, and of his execution by crucifixion) and the assurance of additional detail-and-guidance messages [The New Testament], at the same level of truth/accuracy as what had come before [The Old Testament].
The New Testament writers manifest an awareness of this facilitation, in the use of such expressions as, “declaring to you the whole purpose of God,” “in words … taught by the Spirit,” “what it really is, the word of God,” and “the Lord’s commandment.”

________________________________________________________________

Can we (ANYONE!) afford to IGNORE this?

NOT AT ALL -- if we have ANY concern for (at least) our OWN welfare...

Needless to say, these claims should be of MAJOR / URGENT concern to ALL humans, regardless of any current beliefs, religious traditions, opinions, cultural assumptions, etc.--especially in light of:

Our inability to verify or debunk this warning of post-mortem danger, having zero RELIABLE pre-mortem access to that irreversible post-mortem situation --[Note 3].
Yet having a biologically innate belief that we will be FORCED to experience SOME kind of post-mortem existence [Note 4], and almost universally having the expectation that this post-mortem existent will be morbid at best [Note 5].
Our inability to conclusively discredit the written, narrative accounts of what this from-outside individual Jesus/Christ SAID and DID, during his time on earth [NOTE 6 - the reliability of the gospel accounts, non-legendizing].
Our inability to conclusively deny this from-outside individual's credibility when speaking about the danger and how to avoid it, by somehow believing him to be INSANE (in claiming to be super-natural, from outside the world) or a malicious-but-supremely-effective, deliberate FRAUD. [NOTE 7 - His supernatural authority and character, the "Lord, Liar, or Lunatic" trilemma].

So, this article series is designed to help a reader zoom-into these claims, with early discussion of why it MUST HAVE 'looked like' it did to accomplish its purposes.

Since this is SPECIFICALLY an examination of this 'bible-thing', I will need to use the relevant texts from the message-media to document this for the reader--so their evaluation will be based on PRIMARY DATA, and less so on prior conceptions of the message/media.

Hopefully, the initial logic about disclosure by an Agent/Person/Thing/Group/God/Pantheon/whatever from 'outside' our space-time universe should be clear enough to: the intended readership (mentioned at the beginning), and serve as a framework to situate these details within.

________________________________________________________________

But there is a 'short-cut' here...

Before we dig into the historical details of the message-in-writing (Scripture), we should note its relationship to the central character (Jesus/Christ).

The terminology used in the gospel narratives reflects the duality of his person. "Son of Man" terminology (used only by himself, of himself) emphasizes his coming as a human into the world. "Son of God" would refer to his special status WITHIN the Ultimate/Primal/Absolute/God Agency-Agent, but would also have a connotation of being the authorized representative of that Agency/Agent on earth.

These statements will give the summary of the connection between the Message-in-Writing and the Message-in-Flesh:

[Jesus Speaking:] “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.” [Gospel of John 5.39]
[Jesus Speaking:] "For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. (Gospel of John 5.46)
[Jesus Speaking:] "And taking the twelve, he said to them, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written about the Son of Man by the prophets will be accomplished. For he will be delivered over to the Gentiles and will be mocked and shamefully treated and spit upon. And after flogging him, they will kill him, and on the third day he will rise.” (Gospel of Luke 18.31ff)
[Jesus Speaking:] "And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. (Gospel of Luke 24.26)
[Jesus Speaking:] "Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures (Gospel of Luke 24.44ff).
"Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature" [Book of Hebrews, Chapter 1]

His special status and emissary authority was beautifuly summarized in the prologe to the Gospel of John:

In the beginning there was the Word. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. All things were made by him, and nothing was made without him. In him there was life, and that life was the light of all people. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overpowered it.
The Word was in the world, and the world was made by him, but the world did not know him. He came to the world that was his own, but his own people did not accept him. But to all who did accept him and believe in him he gave the right to become children of God. They did not become his children in any human way—by any human parents or human desire. They were born of God.
The Word became a human and lived among us. We saw his glory—the glory that belongs to the only Son of the Father— and he was full of grace and truth.

IF THIS WAS TRUE, then we can START with the claims of this Message-in-flesh, from 'inside God', with the authority to grant true life (eternal, ehnanced, not subject to decay, robust, etc.).

This would be God-speaking DIRECTLY, and would be the ONLY and BEST source of trustworthy data about ANYTHING He spoke about!

We can start with HIS statements (my recomendation), and may find adequate solidity THERE, to be able to 'slow down' in the examination (40+ pages, sigh/smile) of the Message-in-Writing...

____________________________________________________________

Here we have to TRULY hear and 'judge' this Character's claims...

This character -- Jesus/Christ -- appeared in history during the reign of Augustus Cesar, at the transition of the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire (Augustus being the first emperor).

His birth was nothing like what we might expect of a "Powerful Deity" coming into our history as a human being. Not high-born, his family was a working-class family, living in a 'backwater' section of the land of Israel/Palestine. The town nameed 'Nazareth' in the region of 'the Galilee' was his hometown growing up. Today that area is bordered by modern-day Lebanon (to the north) and Syria (to the east) and with the West Bank directly south of it.

The first 30 years or so, had him growing up there, in humble circumstances, with very little indications of the power and impact of his upcoming public mission. He lived as 'one of us'.

At around 30 years of age, he left home and begain traveling and teaching and helping the people in the area and nearby regions.

This period lasted about 3 years, in which all the statements examined below were uttered and recorded and the various supernatural deeds were experienced/seen by people and also record (often as evidence of his claims, but sometimes only as a quiet deed of healing/restoration).

........................................

Although there were many pre-announcements of his appearance in history in the writings of the Hebrew OT, the complexity and completeness of his future roles created different images of what He would actually LOOK LIKE.

For examples:

he was promised to be one who freed the ancient Hebrew families from bondage, yet was also foretold as being rejected by them.
He was promised to become ultimately the ruler of the entire world, executing utopian justice and deliverance for all strata and class of people, yet was described elsewhere as the victim of a horrible death (in images of the execution type 'crucifixion'-- hundreds of years before such an execution method was commonly used.)
He was promised to arrive as a royal figure, but meek, gentle, and 'lowly'.
He was promised to be God's special, unique, and beloved emissiary, but was also said to become an object of God's punishment--albeit for the crimes of others.

The implementation timing of the various roles foretold for him, had conditional elements in them, with the response of his people having major impact on sequence, duration, and timing.

As history shows, the sequence of roles/tasks ended up as:

Coming to earth as a human, as promised to his people (and to the world);
Offering of an optimum (conditional) earthly future to his people; and--simultaneously-- instructions on how to preclude negative post-mortem life;
Establishment of an emissary group to spread both of the above;
Rejection by the leadership of the people, holding power of influence and law;
Initiation of the 'suffering' and 'punishment' role;
Stage One in universal remediation: victory over death / bodily resurrection with an elevated capability human body.
Return to 'heaven' from earth';
WIP: Stage Two--begining change in the super-set, changes in the 'subterranean forces' of our world, and worldwide dissemination of His instructions about both the afterlife and instructions on how to optimize pre-mortem existence;
Future: Return to earth for implementation of remaining roles.

This article series might be seen as part of the WIP-stage ... dissemination of His instructions about the afterlife.

......................................

As we look now at His statements/claims, you should ask yourself -- at each one:

Can a SANE only-human being make such a claim-- BELIEVING IT HIMSELF -- and expecting others to accept it as true and give their lives for it? [INSANE?}
Can a TRULY MORAL human being make such a claim-- KNOWING IT TO BE FALSE-- but trying (very successfully!) to persuade others to accept it as true, at the risk of their lives? [EVIL-LIAR?]
If the answers to the above questions are NO, then --given that He performed AT LEAST SOME (if not MANY, MOST or ALL) of the 'supernatural' and/or 'miraculous' deeds reported -- can we rationally DENY the claims (in intellectual integrity)? [GOD-IN-FLESH?]
For completeness, I will add this option of "surely He did not say that, but the gospel writer PUT THOSE WORDS in His mouth", but I will use STRIKETHROUGH font to remind us that:
1. We have no real, solid evidence to believe such a theory.
2. if somebody DID do that, then why? Why make their beloved leader look either INSANE or an EVIL-LIAR, if THEY knew better themselves?
3. These claims (and related statements) occur in ALL of the documents, and in ALL of the alleged historical strata in those documents.
4. These claims are sometimes REPEATED in the mouths of hostile disputants, in the course of argumentation or private deliberations.
5. There are plenty of SOLID reasons to reject this false-attribution theory (e.g., from historical context, from textual criticism), but I cannot go into them here.
So, I will remind us that this option is not really available to us this way. [~~NOT-HIS-WORDS?~~]

Since we are focused here on the verbal statements made BY Jesus/Christ ABOUT himself, most of the quotes will come from the Gospel of John. John composed his gospel AFTER the earlier ones of Mark and Matthew (and assumes the reader KNOWS the material in those gospels, e.g. the imprisonment of Jesus' cousin, John the Baptist by King Herod), and so contains much complementary material. He gives us much more of Jesus' teaching and dialogue content, and especially in matters of controversy with the religious leadership. Jesus had to highlight--for the sake of the people of his mission--the DIFFERENCE in AUTHORITY and ACCURACY and RELIABILITY between HIS instructions and those of the religious leaders of the day.

......................................................

Okay, here are some of His claims made, during his lifetime on earth:

“If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.” (John 3.12f)
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.” (John 6:38ff)
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who the Father is except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. [Luke 10:22 also in Matthew 11:27]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.” [John 8.23]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh... And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.” [John 17.1-5]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.” [John 8.58ff]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.“ [John 16.28]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” (Matt 28.18)
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.” [John 6:46]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“I am telling you what I have seen in the Father's presence” [John 8.38]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here” [John 8.42]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“Then Jesus … cried out, "I am not here on my own, but he who sent me is true. You do not know him, but I know him because I am from him and he sent me” [John 7.28-29]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“I and the Father are one." Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?" "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God. … what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'? Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does.” [John 10.30ff]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work” [John 14.9]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life -- only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again” [John 10.17ff]
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]

To these, we might add two over-the-top statements that make NO SENSE (for a good moral human teacher to say!) unless these claims are true:
“All I (Jesus) have is yours (Father), and all you (Father) have is mine (Jesus).” [John 17.10] --Unless the Son is truly God, this statement is utterly ridiculous! "All that God has" vs. "all that a creature has"--NOT a fair swap!
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]
“If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.” [John 14:28] --Although this statement seems obvious to us on the surface, a moments reflection will surface just how preposterous it is--IF JESUS is merely a human! So Bickersteth: "How could a mere man, without absurd presumption, solemnly announce that God the Father was greater than he?"!
[Insane? | Evil-Liar? | GOD-in-Flesh? | ~~Not-His-Words?~~]

......................................................

Okay, how are we supposed to merge these claims with His exemplary and consistently ethical life?
[It is easy to merge them with his supernatural deeds, as they would support each other.]

Consider this extended, insightful analysis from Vinoth Ramachandra, Faiths in Conflict? (pages 110-111)

"Why is the charge of megalomania so difficult to stick on Jesus? Simply because the lifestyle of Jesus and the values he embodied strike even the most hardened sceptic as eminently sane, indeed deeply attractive.
“Here is a man who describes himself as 'gentle and humble in heart' and stoops to wash the feet of his disciples in an act of menial service. In his betrayal and suffering, he refuses to answer violence with violence, but prays for the forgiveness of his torturers. No contemporary of Jesus, or any serious thinker since, has accused Jesus of being insincere or hypocritical in his relationships with either friend or enemy. Gandhi and Martin Luther King both drew their inspiration for how to deal with those who opposed them from the example and teaching of Jesus. Jesus' lifestyle of lowly, compassionate service towards the sick, the vulnerable and the oppressed continues to attract many people to him from diverse cultural backgrounds.
“I would like to suggest that this combination of an other-oriented lifestyle with self-directed claims is what makes Jesus of Nazareth unique.
“Let me elaborate. When we explore the great religious traditions of the world, we come across many great figures who impressed their contemporaries with the other-centeredness of their way of life. They lived lives of exemplary courage, compassion and sacrifice. … . In all these cases there is no call to personal allegiance, no claim to be communicating anything other than a word from God or an insight into ultimate reality.
“On the other side we come across people who do make self-centered claims, but these claims do not impress us for very long. Not only have the Caesars, the Hitlers and Idi Amins of the world disappeared into the mists of history, but their megalomania led them into forms of brutality and self-aggrandizement which seemed to fit quite naturally with the claims they made for themselves.
“It is here that Jesus stands out as unique. One may search all the religious traditions of humankind, and indeed all the great literature of humankind, and still fail to find one like Jesus, who makes seemingly the most arrogant claims concerning himself and yet lives in the most humble and selfless manner conceivable. Jesus of Nazareth simply boggles our imagination.”

________________________________________________________________

So, we have here not just an ‘enlightened human’ – but an Ultimate voice! Time to pay attention!

Just as we can ask the question of WHY about a message-in-WRITING from God-outside coming into history, we now need to ask the same question of the message-in-Flesh Jesus/Christ.

What does He claim was the PURPOSE of his intervention into our world/history, and how did those around him understand his claims?

Like we did above, we will list His claims about His coming to earth. But we will add a few quotes from his closest associates.

And we will have to 'see' these as clearly as we can, so I will be paraphrasing some of the more 1st-century Jewish terminology into contemporary terms/concept (admittedly not exact or contextually nuanced, but accurate at the core and reliable enough for evaluation and acceptance).

I will also be drawing a deliberate, 'rhetorically dramatic' contrast between the clear force of his statements and some human-centric alternatives...(smile).

For, for each of these claims, we should ask ourselves:

Was his purpose to persuade people to practice some new religious rules? [New Rules?]
Was his purpose to get people to worship Him? [Worshp?]
Was his purpose to get people to morally reform their behavior? [Reform Behavior?]
Was his purpose to get people to join some religious organization? [JoinReligion?]
Was his purpose to grant some new kind of life (eternal, vibrant) to anyone who simply believed and trusted Him? [Enhanced Life?]

So, here are some of the claims to assess (some from His intimate circle):

“For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:38ff)
[New Rules? | Worshp? | Reform Behavior? | JoinReligion? | Enhanced Life??]
“When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” [John 17.1-5]
[New Rules? | Worshp? | Reform Behavior? | JoinReligion? | Enhanced Life??]
“He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins.” [John 8.23]
[New Rules? | Worshp? | Reform Behavior? | JoinReligion? | Enhanced Life??]
“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.” [John x.39]
[New Rules? | Worshp? | Reform Behavior? | JoinReligion? | Enhanced Life??]
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. (John 3.16f; author of the gospel of John)
[New Rules? | Worshp? | Reform Behavior? | JoinReligion? | Enhanced Life??]
“He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all. He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony. … The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand. Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life” [John 3.31ff ; John the Baptist]
[New Rules? | Worshp? | Reform Behavior? | JoinReligion? | Enhanced Life??]

________________________________________________________________

Do you see this -- with all the shock/force of it?

This is rightly called 'good news' -- it has the strength of data and beauty of story and promise of safety (and rescue).

Our future was designed for this enhanced/enriched/incorruptible LIFE, and -- in spite of us(!) -- His mission was to re-secure that for us!

in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began [Letter to Titus 1:2]
his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began (2 Timothy 1:9)

________________________________________________________________

Part Two -- What/Where/How is there even such a book, found in our history?

________________________________________________________________

[Note 1]:
I use this "Agency/Agent" image because of the difficulty of categorizing/conceptualizing this original, primal Entity. If--as in the classic Christian position--this unitary entity includes a multiplicity of peer Agents (centers of consciousness and volition), yet acts as a unit (i.e. 'Agency'), this is the closest I can come to a concept we are familiar with. In the Christian tradition, this entity is called a 'trinity'-- THREE (equal persons) in ONE (being/God). But 'Agency/Agent' phrasing could include agency with only ONE agent member, as well as agency with many agent members. My terminology is meant here to allow this multiplicity, since it can (and does) ground social ontologies such as 'species' and 'race'. That is, an ultimate "MANY as ONE, MANY in ONE" can ground both the ONE (group/community) and the MANY (individuals).
[Note 2]: See these works for a description of this development:
1. God Created Humanism: The Christian Basis of Secular Culture. // Hobson, Theo // SPCK:2017.
2. Dominion--How the Christian Revolution Remade the World. // Holland, Tom // BasicBooks:2019.
3. What Has Christianity Ever Done for Us: How it Shaped the Modern World. // Hill, Jonathan // IntervarsityPress:2005
4. The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success. // Stark, Rodney // RandomHouse:2006. [Kindle]
[Note 3]:
1. Humans have always been aware of this issue, and generally are uncomfortable about that ‘realm of existence’ (“ghosts” as separate from “spirits”)
2. Most worldviews with explicit beliefs about post‐ mortem existence of humans connect the experience of that post‐mortem existence to the ethical qualities of pre‐ mortem actions.
3. Most beliefs about what that is like and how to influence what the experience would be like, are actually just guesses based on reason/logic, interpretations of reports of NDEs, visions by prophets, extrapolations from pre‐mortem experience, etc. We do not have credible reports of deceased persons speaking CLEARLY to the living, describing the nature of that existence and instructions on how to influence the outcome of one’s life. And the reports that are thought to be possibly genuine are sporadic, non-uniform, and not in large enough numbers or duration to validate beliefs.
4. As such, they have no solid credibility and to base one’s expectation of that future on those is dangerously unreasonable. They are no more trustworthy than the fanciful images crafted by Hollywood (e.g. What Dreams May Come (1998), Constantine (2005) , Buffy the Vampire Slayer—Season Six). They can provide no CONFIDENCE about that future.
5. Since many/most theistic worldviews describe a ‘spiritual realm’ populated by gods (good and bad) and ‘lesser spirits’ like angels and demons in conflict (often about how humanity is valued or hated), there is always a reason to be suspicious about the ethical intentions and message contents delivered by a non‐ human agent.
6. This is unfortunate, since those agents would presumably have some accurate data about our post‐mortem futures. But without any way to establish their intent [e.g. to deceive, to educate, to warn, to confuse, to incite] in disclosing something audibly (disembodied voice or spirit‐possessed human) or via dreams, visions, or altered states of consciousness, we just cannot ‘admit that evidence to the court’.
7. Ideally, we would WANT to have a description of this FROM whoever CREATED that realm, and knew it ‘inside and out’. But – because of the possibility of intentional misinformation— we still need some way to authenticate the messenger, before analyzing the disclosure.
[Note 4]: From Barrett, Justin L.. Born Believers: The Science of Children's Religious Belief . Atria Books.
"Belief begins in the brain. Under the sway of powerful internal and external influences, children understand their environments by imagining at least one creative and intelligent agent, a grand creator and controller that brings order and purpose to the world. Further, these beliefs in unseen super beings help organize children’s intuitions about morality and surprising life events, making life meaningful. Summarizing scientific experiments conducted with children across the globe, Professor Barrett illustrates the ways human beings have come to develop complex belief systems about God’s omniscience, the afterlife, and the immortality of deities. He shows how the science of childhood religiosity reveals, across humanity, a “natural religion,” the organization of those beliefs that humans gravitate to organically, and how it underlies all of the world’s major religions, uniting them under one common source."
"Exactly why believing in souls or spirits that survive death is so natural for children (and adults) is an area of active research and debate. A consensus has emerged that children are born believers in some kind of afterlife , but not on why this is."
[For a refutation of why the common belief that belief in an afterlife is simple 'wish fulfillment', see Barrett's discussion -- footnote 10, starting page 268 of the above.]
[Note 5]: From Beyond the Threshold: Afterlife Beliefs and Experiences in World Religions, 2nd Ed, Christopher M. Moreman, Rowman&Littlefield: 2018, pp.2148-249:
"With this in mind, we must then turn to the comparison itself. In looking at the historical evolution of ideas, the first observation that can be made is that of a common understanding of the fate of the dead first appearing in the earliest records of human history in a number of different cultures, regardless of geography. In these ancient systems, upon death some spiritual aspect of every being is thought to continue its existence outside of the body. Typically, the spiritual side of human nature subdivides into several components, each responsible for different aspects of the human character. Examples of these aspects include the Egyptian ba and ka; the Greek psyche, thymos, and noos; and the Chinese kwei and shen, among others. In any event, there remains some connection between the recognizable aspects of the individual and his or her fate in the underworld. This spiritual aspect, however it is named, is considered to be but a mere shade of its former self and is thought to wander among the nameless throngs of the dead in a subterranean underworld.
"Specific details of the domain of these early ghostly remains, the underworld itself, are generally lacking across cultures, though what little is said includes some correspondence from one culture to the next. The underworld of the Mesopotamians is seen as a dark and dreary place in which any joy is connected with the living legacy of the dead. The more progeny one leaves behind, the better off one is in death, which seems to indicate a common theme of ancestral cults seen elsewhere. Egyptian details are scant as their earliest texts deal specifically with the unique fate of the pharaoh. Still, it would appear that the earliest conception of the afterlife of the average person is one not unlike that of the Mesopotamians in some respects; the dead would wander through a treacherous underworld with the goal of eventually merging into a collective Sun or else simply being annihilated. For the Egyptians, life was a bounteous pleasure, and in death there was no greater boon than being a part of the Sun in its daily journey over the glorious Nile valley and no greater fear than never having the opportunity to share in that experience again. Later African beliefs often echo these earlier Egyptian ideas about the relationship between this world and that of the ancestors. The Homeric notion of Hades and the early Jewish concept of Sheol both describe an anonymous and depressive underworld, just as the Chinese describe the Yellow Springs. These places all share the characteristics of being dreary worlds existing below the ground and containing the multitude of dead, who form a kind of anonymous collective. ... The Vedic description of the afterlife differs from those previously described, though remains in a similar mold. The pitrloka, or World of the Fathers, is described as a place of idyllic beauty, with flowing streams, singing birds, and beautiful maidens. On the other hand, the World of the Fathers is populated by the nameless throngs, just as are the other underworlds described. Though the Vedic afterlife seems more like a kind of paradise, those who occupy it rely upon the graces of the living to continue the rituals necessary for their anonymous enjoyment. ... In all cases, the dead were thought to exist as spiritual beings that were not as whole as they were in life, literally lacking liveliness. In fact, most often the dead formed a kind of vague collective as part of some abstract otherworld."
[Note 6]: On the reliability of the narratives of Christ's words and deeds (i.e. the NT Gospels).
- A large number of articles on this site discuss this, and provide possible/plausible/probable answers to objections to trusting the NT literature, so I cannot go into it here (there will be a good bit of data provided later in this document series, though.)
- But in case someone wants to consult published works by scholars (at varying levels of detail), here are a few that I have found helpful, in order from MORE CONCISE to MORE DETAILED:
  1. Is the New Testament Reliable? // Head, Peter M // GroveBooks:2003.
  2. Can We Trust the Gospels? // Williams, Peter J // Crossway:2018.
  3. Is the New Testament Reliable? // Barnett, Paul // IntervarsityPress:1986.
  4. Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony.// Bauckham, Richard // Eerdmans:2006
  5. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (2nd Ed). // Blomberg, Craig // IntervarsityPress:2007.
  6. The Historical Reliability of John's Gospel--Issues and Commentary. // Blomberg, Craig L // IntervarsityPress:2001.
  7. The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition. // Eddy, Paul Rhodes // and Gregory A Boyd. // Baker:2007.
  8. Christobiography: Memory, History, and the Reliability of the Gospels. // Keener, Craig // Eerdmans:2019.
[Note 7]: On the supernatural authority and character of Jesus/Christ.
- Once we have accepted that we do not have conclusive grounds for REJECTING the accounts of Jesus' words and deeds, we much now try to UNDERSTAND the implications of those. In other words, what do they tell us about his origins, knowledge, reliability, etc.

Christian ThinkTank Homepage...[https://www.Christianthinktank.com]