Subject: Re: Use of 'Lord's Prayer' in secular settings
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 09:53:36 GMT
From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Reply-To:  
Organization: iiNet Limited
Newsgroups: aus.religion,aus.religion.christian,nz.soc.religion
In <>, "Tigger"  wrote:

>Two thousand years after Jesus walked the earth, there are many competing
>religions. All claim to have the truth, and most claim unique truth. Many
>make all sorts of claims about life after death, creation, heaven/hell, the
>way to achieve eternal happiness, etc. There is no way that we, as God made
>us, can reliably distinguish between them.

How hard have you tried?

>Please explain to me why the book detailing the events you describe above is
>any more reliable than the one that came after, which said Jesus was only a
>prophet?

As you know, I can only give a subjective answer to that question.
It works for me. 

>>You are free to accept it or reject it.
>>No-one is forcing you to do either.
>God is virtually forcing me to reject it, by knowing what it would take to
>convince me, and refusing to provide that. What else can I do?

What have you tried?

>Really. I mean that. What else can I do?

If you _really_ mean that, my answer is this.

Find a church community which has a significant proportion of members
with similar age/interests/socio- economic bacground to you. Go along
there, get involved with the community. Listen to the teaching, and
ask lots of questions. Pray alone and together with other people -
there will be people at the Church who can help you with this. 

Don't expect instant results. Do expect it to make a change in your
quality of life and your outlook on life.

Call me in 3 months and let me know how you are doing.

>>If you, like Julian, think that nothingness is a better alternative
>>than eternal life, then I suspect you will get the best possible
>>outcome you hope for.

>It is not what I think is best that matters, it is what God thinks is best.

But you are saying that what God thinks best is immoral.

If what God thinks is best is what really matters, then why not just
do it?

>God supposedly gives this great eternal life to some, but not others, and
>bases the decision on whether or not they believe one out of a hundred
>myriad tales of miracles, the supernatural, and what God is.

That's not what I believe.

I believe that God gives eternal life to those who accept and believe
that loving God and loving our fellow human beings is the essence of
what life is all about. That is the message which Jesus taught, and
which is church proclaims. As a wise rabbi said about 100 years before
the time of Jesus, "the rest is commentary".

>>>Got bases his decision entirely 100% on something which is not able to be
>>>shown definitively, which allows scum to achieve the good thing where good
>>>people will not, and which bears absolutely no resemblence to the morals
>he
>>>gave the creation in the first place. Further, God himself has chosen not
>to
>>>make the thing you must believe to get the good thing something obvious.
>>
>>Not sure what you are getting at here.

>It is immoral to offer a reward only if the applicant believes a certain
>thing, but not to give him any reason to believe it. It is further immoral
>to give him reason to disbelieve the thing.

If you have no reason to believe, then don't. No-one is forcing you to
believe anything. The Gospel is an offer, not a test. If the offer
does not appeal to you, you are free to reject it.

>>Would you be happier if God gave you no choice or freedom at all?

>The question means nothing to me, even in this hypothetical frame.
>What would make me happy? That, if there were a god, his choice on who got
>the 'good thing' was based on something that makes sense to those competing
>for it. For example, being a basically good human being, contributing to
>society, leaving the world a better place than when you arrived, raising
>happy healthy and good children.

>I consider it immoral to base it on belief. Every person should know that
>the prize actually exists, that they really are competing. Only then will
>they be able to truly choose which path to take.

There is no competition. My hope of eternal life is not affected at
all by whether or not you believe it, or strive for it, or laugh at
it. You have heard the Gospel, and the decision whether you accept it
or not is entirely up to you. 

You seem to be trying to transfer responsibility for your eternal fate
onto me, or God, or the Church. 

I have nothing to gain and nothing to lose by your decision, except
that I quite like you as a person, and I think that both you and the
Church would benefit if you became a Christian. 

God has given you all the information you are going to get to make
your decision. Get used to it. That is not going to change.

The Church has done a pretty lousy job of preserving and spreading the
Gospel in many cases, but with a bit of effort it is still possible
that anyone who really wants to can discern the truth about love of
God and neighbour beneath the dross.

You are an individual, Tigger. You have the choice. 

This is not something you can blame on anyone else.

>>It is both obvious and easy for me.

>But not me.

Give what I have suggested above a try, and you will find it easier
than you think.

>>In fact the only people I ever hear saying how 'hard' it is are people
>>who put lots of energy into denying that it matters at all.

>Okay, well here's one for you that thinks it matters more than anything else
>in the world, that has put a lot of energy into discovering God, and that
>still says there is no way that she can claim belief without lying.

Never give up on yourself. Or God.

cheers

N+

Nigel B. Mitchell