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

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)...

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:

1. Part One [This set of documents] -- Do we even HAVE a concrete communication from the 'outside'? I.e. what/why/why take the 'Bible' seriously;
2. Part Two [TBD] -- Ok, I can take it seriously now (as a communication from OUTSIDE), but WHAT IS ITS MESSAGE to me, that is so important to know/believe?

• [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 ...

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

1. The central statements by the One Who Knew -- the Christ/Jesus
2. What exactly does the Bible MEAN by the words "reveal" and "revelation"?
3. The Human setting in which it would occur
4. The possible "Other Side" setting from which it might occur
5. If it 'occurred', what might it look like, if its intent was to reach us?
6. Excursus: How we "process" communication

7. Other means of revelation/disclosure other than written forms.
8. This communication in history: the recording of the message(s)
9. This communication in history: recognition of the authentic messages (canon)
10. This communication in history: the preservation of the source data (OT)
11. This communication in history: the preservation of the source data (NT)

12. Translation, Teaching, and Theological Development in History
13. Specific/Important Terms: Inspiration and Illumination: What they ARE and ARE NOT
14. The term "Inerrancy", the Data of Scripture, and the Approach of Honest Faith
15. Issues in Interpretation (Hermeneutics) and "Scripture Twisting"
16. Important Distinctions within the doctrine of revelation

17. Sola Scriptura versus historical religious tradition?
18. The Clarity of Scripture vs. the "Hidden-ness" of God's Disclosure
19. Skeptical Arguments of our Day
20. Skeptical Arguments of our Day-Part II
21. Course Implications for our Lives

• [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.