That was a very interesting post, especially the last part.  I’ve thought similar things, but from a different perspective.  I’d like to ask you a few questions to further my understanding, if you don’t mind.

I want to keep this brief, so I’ll just address one paragraph, the second to last, beginning with “I do not wish death or hardship upon anyone...”

First, a smidgen about me.  I spend no less than 2 hours every day worshipping God, but I find the Bible more useful for understanding Christians than understanding God.

Do you believe the Bible is the sole written authority providing information about God?  If so, on what basis?  If other scriptures claim equal or superior authority, on what basis is that claimed authority dismissed? 

[For example, you mention muslims and hindus.  Obviously muslims consider the Koran the supreme book for understanding God.  Hindus (which is eqivalent to saying “the American religion") are either personalists or impersonalists.  In the impersonalist (atheistic) category are the animists and the advaitins.  A chief book of advaita, Vasistha’s Yoga, claims it is the supreme scripture.  In the chief book of the personalists, Bhagavad-gita, God claims to give all knowledge, knowing which nothing further is to be known.]

I ask this because you dismiss the religious sentiments of others, claiming they lead to eternal damnation in Hell, based on your feeling of Biblical superiority over other scriptures.  I am very eager to understand how this authority is established. 

-----
Also, I want to etrapolate on your idea.  Christians generally believe that animals have no soul.  If that is true, it would follow that their suffering is greater than humans, because they wouldn’t have any opportunity for eternal life with the Lord.  In other words, assuming “no soul for animals”, their only chance at comfort and satisfaction is in this world, but Christians take that from them without a thought.  Does the Christian belief that animals have no soul mean that we should or should not treat them mercifully?

Is is that comments just don’t get responses here, or were the questions too hard?

I didn’t find them especially hard, although it does take time to respond.  When I find time, I will definitely respond.

Thanks.  I can be patient.  I thought you’d be able to give a thoughtful response, so I didn’t want it to just scroll off the page into oblivion.

There was a piece in the Baltimore Sun this past week concerning Christian relief groups involved with Tsunami relief.  According to the article, the majority of Christian relief groups keep missions and humanitarian efforts seperate—conversion is not emphasised, the act of humanitarian relief is in itself a witness.

There are of course exceptions, such as Franklin Graham’s Samaratan Purse that see humanitarian work as a opportunity to build trust with non-Christians and then eventually work towards conversion.  Groups like these alarm many Muslims in the affected countries—there has been enough concern in Indonesia of Christians adopting orphaned Muslim children, that an effort by the government has been launched to pair the children with Muslims.

In my own view, I am concerned about using disaster and personal misery as an opportunity to teach the Gospel.  I once spoke with an American missionary in the Ukraine and he told me flat out that poverty creates more opportunity for Christian missions.  I believe feeding and clothing the hungry misses as a means of converting non-Christians misses the point.  There is an ulterior motive that help is being provided not just because it is the right thing to do and an expression of faith, but also because we are hoping to convert.  This taking advantage of somebody else’s misery.

I think that it is pretty obvious from the original post that I subscribe to the belief that the Bible is the inspired Word of God.  As it contains several exclusive claims, not unlike most other foundational religious works, I also believe that Jesus is the only path to relationship with God (John 14:6).

What basis do I have for this?  First, there is the book itself.  I am confident that the book I have on my desk is the same one inked so long ago.  The historical record of the document itself is amazing.  I am also amazed at the completeness and integrity of a work written over a period of 1500 years by 40 plus authors (instruments).  As time goes by, the archaeological evidence for the events described in its pages continues to grow.  I find it extremely accurate, both historically and spiritually.

Second, there is the content of the book.  It defines completely who man is, who he is supposed to be and what his ultimate destiny is.  Every failing I see in myself and others is explained within its pages, as is every virtue.  As I look at the tenets of other religions around me, I see a marked difference between all others and this relationship with God we call Christianity.  In every case, the pillars or the law or karma push man to do good to be right with the religion’s definition of God.  Yet, I know the darkness in my own heart and I see that I am helpless to bridge the gap between the divine and my own self.  I am touched and humbled that God himself would pay the price for my own sin.

Thirdly, my own experience with God is a tremendous testimony to His existence and the truth within His word.  I cannot count the times He speaks to me through the pages of his word and as I pray and commune with Him.  So many times I have been in want and my needs were miraculously provided.  Again and again my family and I have been spared grave injury or death by inches or moments.

With so many exclusive works claiming to be truth, either one alone is the truth or they are all false.  (I know that there are some who hold that every path is a different way to the same destination, but I reject that.  Choosing the path we like best is a perfect reflection of our base nature, a nature I see as fallen, self-seeking and lazy.) My study has led me to the judgment that this one is true, and so I follow it.

You obviously believe otherwise, and I respect that completely.  You think I am incorrect, and I think it is you that is mistaken.  With a free will, we have the liberty to believe what we will, and disagree with each other.  I’m sure we disagree on other issues as well, and we probably agree on some points too. 

Yes, I do dismiss the religious sentiments of others because I believe they do face eternal separation from God.  You disagree, and most probably dismiss my own religious sentiments – unless you are a member of the “all paths” crowd.  But hey, if that is the case, then not only am I wrong…I’m also right!

As far as the animal question, I do not believe that animals have souls.  The death of a human whose soul will be lost eternally is a tremendous loss.  The death of an animal does not result in such a loss.  In Genesis 9:2-3, God gave all creatures into man’s hand for his service and for food.  I believe that cruelty is wrong, but it is possible to use animals as beasts of burden and food without being cruel.

This is indeed a challenge.  We should be motivated to give and serve without expecting a return as far as conversions go.  Humanitarian relief is indeed a witness, as we are seeing in Indonesia, where the government is asking us to leave because the cultivated images of Americans & Australians are being shattered. 

Yet, my opinion of letting actions speak instead of words is always tempered by the thought that if a person is starving spiritually and I have the sustenance they require, what does that make me when I choose not to give it to them.

Don’t take me wrong, I am firmly against the “time-share” approach to aid – where they have to sit down and listen to an hour motivational talk about Jesus before they get their 10 lbs of rice.  We give and serve because it is the right thing to do, because the affected people need it, and because it does further God’s kingdom (John 13:35).

Thank you for addressing my questions.  I have to split my response into two parts so it’ll fit.

“…the Bible is the inspired Word of God.”

I believe that.  What I do not accept is that it is the only inspired Word of God.  Is it reasonable to think that the Bible details the complete information about God, or that there even is such a thing as complete knowledge of God?  As I understand, there is a constant competition between God’s greatness, and His own knowledge of His greatness, both of which are ever-increasing. 

“I am also amazed at the completeness and integrity of a work written over a period of 1500 years by 40 plus authors (instruments).  As time goes by, the archaeological evidence for the events described in its pages continues to grow.”

The scriptures I put my faith in are here: http://www.vedabase.net/
Of these, Bhagavad-gita is the most prominent; Srimad Bhagavatam is the chief; and Caitanya Caritamrita is the most exalted.  Bhagavad-gita is the direct spoken instructions of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.  Srimad Bhagavatam is an 18,000-verse poem compiled by the Personality of Godhead describing Himself in great detail through His own words and the words of His devotees.  It is directly the Lord Himself, in literary form.  Caitanya Caritamrita is a first-hand description of the activities and mood of the Supreme Personality of Godhead in His golden form, His most recent (about 500 years ago), rarest, and most merciful appearance.  It is all based on one scripture, the Vedas, which are the sound of the breathing of God.  The Vedas consist of a total of 4,520 books, divided from one song into different subjects and categories by the Lord Himself, who then summarized the work in the extremely terse Vedanta Sutras, and explained the essence of it all in Srimad Bhagavatam.  His activities demonstrating spiritual perfection are detailed in Caitanya Caritamrita.  These provide such as complete picture of spiritual knowledge that they establish themselves as the standard by which all other scriptures can be evaluated.  In Bhagavad-gita, the Lord personally declares, “I shall now declare unto you in full this knowledge, both phenomenal and numinous. This being known, nothing further shall remain for you to know.”
http://www.vedabase.net/bg/7/2/en

As for archeological evidence, 1) it’s irrelevant, and 2) I can’t imagine how it could be possibly construed to support the Biblical version of history.  That seems like another topic though.

I am touched and humbled that God himself would pay the price for my own sin.

It is a fact that our sins are beyond our means to atone for by our own work, however one must be very sincerely sorry for one’s sins for God to relieve us of them.  The idea that one can sin Monday through Saturday, make reconciliation then take communion on Sunday morning, and resume sinning Sunday afternoon, is simply to commit repeated offenses against the Lord.  Yet this is the attitude of many, many Christians.  It is also a theological error to think that God ever suffers, or that He is ever materially embodied.  His form is always spiritual, whether He is in His own realm or when He appears on this world or elsewhere.

“Thirdly, my own experience with God is a tremendous testimony to His existence and the truth within His word.  I cannot count the times He speaks to me through the pages of his word and as I pray and commune with Him.  So many times I have been in want and my needs were miraculously provided.  Again and again my family and I have been spared grave injury or death by inches or moments.”

My faith in the scriptures I mentioned comes as a result of my own life-changing mystical experience.  I had mostly devoted my life to my spiritual inquiry, but I was falling far short of actual realization, so I gave up everything in pursuit to understand what is True.  On the very first day of my quest, I found Bhagavad-gita As It Is.  I couldn’t understand its teachings at all, but I couldn’t deny its majesty.  A few days later, still unable to comprehend, I prayed for the answer.  Two nights later Krishna appeared in my bedroom in the middle of the night as I was absorbed in studying Bhagavad-gita.  He personally gave me instructions about myself, Himself, time, material action, devotional service, and His ultimate objective.  He then situated me at the very border of spiritual and material life, giving a clear view of both, and promised He would return to me at my final moments in this body to bring me back Home, back to Godhead.  Although I was (and am still) a beginner in spiritual life, I have found that everything He showed me that night is documented in the Vedic scriptures.

(part 2)

“With so many exclusive works claiming to be truth, either one alone is the truth or they are all false.”

That’s material logic, and doesn’t apply to scriptures. “Logic cannot provide final proof of anything.” (Vedanta sutra 2.1.11) “One should not use logic to try to understand what is inconceivable.” (Mahabharata, Bhisma-parva 5.22) Many scriptural statements appear contradictory (whether between different scriptures, between different passages in one scripture, or even self-contradicting statements within a single verse), but this is not a flaw.  The real purport of the scriptures is hidden, and only revealed to persons with no objective other than to please God. 

” You obviously believe otherwise, and I respect that completely.  You think I am incorrect, and I think it is you that is mistaken.”

Even those who are in full knowledge of the truth may disagree with each other, while neither is incorrect.  That shouldn’t be taken to mean that everyone’s opinion is right or equal, but that the Lord is simultaneously absolute and variegated.  However, I must point out that I was originally responding to your comment about people of other faiths going to eternal Hell because of their misfortune of having not been sufficiently exposed or convinced of the need to accept only Jesus as their personal savior.  That view is not only erroneous but also offensive to God because it portrays Him as unjust.  That’s a whole topic unto itself.

“Yes, I do dismiss the religious sentiments of others because I believe they do face eternal separation from God.  You disagree, and most probably dismiss my own religious sentiments – unless you are a member of the “all paths” crowd.  But hey, if that is the case, then not only am I wrong…I’m also right!”

You’re saying that a person can devote their entire life to trying to please God, but be forced to suffer eternally in Hell because they didn’t hear about Jesus.  That is insane, again portraying God as an essentially heartless, random dispenser of severe punishment.  Those are not religious sentiments.  However, I do not at all dismiss your actual religious sentiments, contrary to your assumption.  The test of religion is whether it helps a person to develop love of God, which you are obviously doing.  Unfortunately the Devil is in the details, such as your concept of Hell and who goes there.

---------
On the topic of animals, I notice that you quoted God’s angry allowance to sinners.  Originally, His plan was that all would be vegetarians (Genesis 1:29), but then he gave some allowance for sinners.  Sometimes as a child I pestered my mother for something, disrespecting her obvious wishes; and after some time she relented, telling me that I was going to do what I wanted anyway, so just go ahead.  This is God’s mood expressed in Genesis 9:2-3.  After the Flood, He gave allowance to Noah’s family to eat fish because there was no land for cultivating.  Clearly this isn’t His preference, but it was necessary.  Later, the Bible tells what He actually wants, “The cow will feed with the bear, their young will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox.” (Isaiah 11:7) ”The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, but dust will be the serpent’s food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain,” says the LORD.” (Isaiah 65:25)
Clearly, in Heaven even the wolves, lions, and bears eat without violence, but Christians offensively prefer to adhere to God’s angry accommodation for sinners in direct disobedience of His order, instead of actually trying to please Him, figuring that Jesus’ suffering pays for Christian sins.  Thus they send the most helpless among us to slaughter, and wipe their bloody hands on Jesus’ cross, all in the name of so-called religion.  It’s so shameful.

After reading what I just wrote, I want to expand briefly on one part and clarify some things…

First, I want to mention in comparison to the Bible’s 40 authors over 1500 years, that according to the Vedas themselves, the Vedas are eternally existing as spiritual sound as one song, and were divided and entirely dictated by the Lord in one sitting, penned buy Ganapati, under an agreement between them to do it uninterrupted. 

Second, about my statement that God’s form is always spiritual, never material.  God does not ever become man, nor does man ever become God.  However, by constant association with God by hearing about Him, chanting His glories, remembering Him, serving Him, et cetera, even man’s material body becomes spiritualized in the same way that an iron rod situated in fire attains the qualities of fire while remaining iron.  That also gives an example of how a scriptural statement can appear self-contradicting.  A saint’s body can be said both to be spiritual not material, and material not spiritual; with both statements factually correct.

Also I do accept the notion that Jesus is God’s only son, while also understanding that God personally fathered more than 160,000 sons during His visit to Earth 5000 years ago, and that He is the Father of all living entities (although in tattva [defined below] we’re actually all daughters in relation to Him, not sons.) All these apparent contradictions are reconciled by understanding the difference between what’s called in Sanskrit lila and tattva.  Lila means pastimes, and tattva means truth.  God’s pastimes, His pleasure, is superior to the objective truth.  In the Rasa-dance, Krishna simulataneously and personally danced with each of His 108 milkmaid girlfriends, as each of them knew He was dancing only with her.  In the contradiction between the truth (Krishna taking many forms to dance with each) and God’s pastime (Krishna exclusively dedicating Himself to one girl), His pastime always wins. 

Thus it can be understood that God’s pastime with Jesus is as the Father of His only son, contradictions notwithstanding. 

Actually I wonder if the Bible says anything about God’s pastimes, other than those in relation with this world.  Recently my aunt asked me if I worshipped the same God as Christians.  I replied that I believe “yes,” but after I thought about it a while, I wondered if the Bible actually tells enough about God to properly address the question.  I do know that the names Christ and Krishna are essentially identical.  Sanskrit is a phoenetic alphabet (literally meaning “perfectly crafted language"), and phoenetically Christ is spelled Kriist.  Krishna is pronounced variously in different times and places as Krooshna, Krishna, or Krista.  Kriist, Krista.  Who do you think Jesus got his last name from?  His Father, perhaps?

It is a fact that our sins are beyond our means to atone for by our own work, however one must be very sincerely sorry for one’s sins for God to relieve us of them.  The idea that one can sin Monday through Saturday, make reconciliation then take communion on Sunday morning, and resume sinning Sunday afternoon, is simply to commit repeated offenses against the Lord.  Yet this is the attitude of many, many Christians.

And it is a wrong attitude.  The basis of the sacrifice of Christ was to bring us into relationship with God, but the behavior simply increases the separation all the while assuaging the conscience of the ‘believer’. (And I fear for them.) Grace is never cheap, and never cheapened – even by the shallow attitudes of some.

All paths do not lead where we want them to simply because we desire them to.  There are situations where there is more than one way to reach a destination and there are also locations which can only be reached by one route.

I want to believe that people are destined to spend eternity in hell, separated from God.  I don’t feel that way because I’m mean or vindictive.  But I don’t see it as punitive, but more as resultant.  And I don’t believe it goes against God’s nature when a soul is cast away.  You mentioned the paradoxes that our mortal minds cannot comprehend, and the full nature of God truly defies us.  He is both completely just, and completely merciful. 

We cannot reconcile the two, yet He is perfectly both.  Justice means that sin cannot be tolerated within His presence.  Mercy is that he provided a path (or many – as you see it) to be reconciled to Himself.  Yet, what if one chooses to path that leads away, or lies down and refuses to take any path?

Interesting discussion, though.  I wish you the best as you travel down your road.  My God keep and preserve your soul.  And mine as well.

I don’t see fairness in eternal punishment for a relatively brief time of sinning, what to speak of for worshipping Him in the “wrong” religion!  The only way hell can be eternal is if it is not only punishment like physical torture, but also continued temptation and opportunity to sin.  That also allows the opportunity to refuse to sin, and thereby become gradually redeemed.  It has to be difficult to disagree with that.

I also have a hard time imagining of a single soul whom God would abandon eternally.  We all have free will and with that God even goes so far as to allow us to forget Him for a while, but it’s His will that we remember Him and resume our loving relationships with Him.  All He has to do is reveal Himself, and He is so inconceivably irresistably attractive and loveable that every last soul will pray to Him with hearts full of love.  The ability to forgive originates with God.  I’m quite confident that no one will be left in Hell forever.  Hell doesn’t even exist forever (though I’m sure it would seem like a mighty long time).

An interesting description of Hell is given in Srimad Bhagavatam, Canto 5, Chapter 26:
http://www.vedabase.net/sb/5/26/en

After the all the descriptions of punishemnt is a very informative verse:
SB 5.26.37: “My dear King Parīkṣit, in the province of Yamarāja there are hundreds and thousands of hellish planets. The impious people I have mentioned — and also those I have not mentioned — must all enter these various planets according to the degree of their impiety. Those who are pious, however, enter other planetary systems, namely the planets of the demigods. Nevertheless, both the pious and impious are again brought to earth after the results of their pious or impious acts are exhausted."
It seems fair to me.

Pandu das wrote: That’s material logic, and doesn’t apply to scriptures. “Logic cannot provide final proof of anything.” (Vedanta sutra 2.1.11) “One should not use logic to try to understand what is inconceivable.” (Mahabharata, Bhisma-parva 5.22)

Wow! For someone who rejects logic, you sure take up a lot of space and time engaging in it!

I don’t see fairness in eternal punishment for a relatively brief time of sinning…

I disagree with this statement for three reasons:

First, I have never seen any evidence that fairness is guaranteed;

Second, if fairness is guaranteed, I’m not convinced that the human concept of what is fair and what is not matches God’s concept of the same;

Third, punishments regularly exceed the period of offense and I do not see it as unfair.  Example: A man rapes a woman (for roughly 10 minutes), is later convicted and receives a 20 year prison term.  The punishment is 1 million times longer than the duration of the offense.

I’m actually please at the paradox within the God I believe in - he is both just (fair - which means we receive full punishment for our sins) and merciful (which means he has provided a way out).

I think the conclusion is that we have drastically different views of what and whom God is and how humans are to relate to him.