169. Dr. Michael Heiser On Why Christians Are Skeptical of the Supernatural (Podcast)

[Philemon]

It would be very easy for that Christian Evangelist to say something like, “Well, we don’t really know what that person’s spiritual state was because they could have believed that sometime in their childhood they actually could have accepted Christ. They could have done this, that, and the other thing. That’s why their experience works out that way.

Reading this caused me to think of Ken R. Vincent's amazon review of Nancy Evans Bush's book, Dancing Past the Dark on distressing NDE's where he says, "In my opinion, Bush has provided a comprehensive, well-written resource that will soon be accessible in hard copy for every reader or researcher throughout the world. My only regret is that Bush failed to include the relevant "fact" (previously published in the Fall 2009 issue of VITAL SIGNS) that prior to her own negative NDE, she had been "saved" twice by Billy Graham himself! Fundamentalist Christians need to know this!"

A portion of Nancy Bush's NDE can be found at http://www.near-death.com/archetypal.html. Here is the gist of it:

Nancy Evans Bush, a devout Christian, had an unusual near-death experience resulting from a severe complication during childbirth. In her own words, she described seeing unusual mandalas during her near-death experience: "I was rocketing through space like an astronaut without a capsule with immense speed and great distance. A small group of circles appeared ahead of me. To the right was just dark space. The circles were black and white and made a clicking sound as they snapped black to white and white to black. They were not evil exactly, just mocking and mechanistic. The message in their jeering was, "Your life never existed. The world never existed. Your family never existed. You were allowed to imagine it. You were allowed to make it up. It was never there. There was nothing there. There never was anything there. You're not real."

Several years after her near-death experience, Nancy was looking through a book on eastern philosophy. What she saw in the book so upset her she threw the book across the room. In the Eastern philosophy book was the same circular shape she saw in her near-death experience. It was the Chinese symbol "yin-yang" which represents the oneness of all so-called opposite principles we find in the universe.

I wonder what Dr. Heiser would have to say about this? Reality just doesn't work within the rigid framework of Christian doctrine, whatever it's stripe. I've spent years of my life trying to live my life and understand my existence within the narrow framework of reformed theology and, in short, it drove me nuts. If God isn't bigger than the concept of "God" I was immersed in back in the day, I don't think there's much hope for anyone! In any case, being a card-carrying Christian didn't seem to do Nancy Bush any good when she had her NDE. So, the question to Dr. Heiser would be, "Why would God let a genuine Christian have such an experience?"

Just a thought.

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by Philemon

Reading this caused me to think of Ken R. Vincent's amazon review of Nancy Evans Bush's book, Dancing Past the Dark on distressing NDE's where he says, "In my opinion, Bush has provided a comprehensive, well-written resource that will soon be accessible in hard copy for every reader or researcher throughout the world. My only regret is that Bush failed to include the relevant "fact" (previously published in the Fall 2009 issue of VITAL SIGNS) that prior to her own negative NDE, she had been "saved" twice by Billy Graham himself! Fundamentalist Christians need to know this!"

hope to have her on soon. the Billy Graham thing is pretty startling, but then again... wait, I'm gonna hold my ammo until the interview

[segovius]

Originally Posted by anonymous

How is Christianity in contradiction with Jesus's early teaching?

Specifically in the recasting of doctrine by Paul which is what the Church is based on and which was opposed by Jesus's own disciples. And they should know what he taught.

The rift was a significant one which is played down by Christians today - and the reasons for this are obvious - which centres around Paul's contention that believers should abandon Jewish law and the disciples' belief (one derived from Jesus himself) that followers should not.

Jesus on many occasions explicitly reaffirmed his Judaic legacy and stipulated that part of his mission was to uphold it:

In Matthew 5:17-18 Jesus says, "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets"

When the Apostles heard that Paul was teaching the Corinthians not to follow the Law they actually went there and to Galatia to straighten them out - they accepted this at first and then Paul gets on their case and - unbelievably - tells them they are accepting a false Gospel (from the Disciples of Christ!!!!!) but in doing so admits his is a different one than Jesus's.

Galatians 1:6 "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel"

Later as the argument with the Apostles escalates he falls out with the Apostles completely and starts ranting against them, sniping and generally insulting them.

So, as the Church is essentially based on Pauline doctrines and not those of the early Apostles - which included Jesus's own brother - then we can assume there is contradiction.

And this is before we get anywhere near the suppression of the Gnostic Gospels (some of which are undoubtedly genuine), selection of the actual New Testament (some of which is undoubtedly adjusted by redactors) and later extraneous doctrine decided hundreds of years after the fact for political reasons.

[segovius]

Originally Posted by Philemon

So, the question to Dr. Heiser would be, "Why would God let a genuine Christian have such an experience?"

Just a thought.

I've been thinking a lot along such lines recently and have some ideas. It may be that we have until the present time been dealing with what we might call, for want of a better term, 'linear spirituality' - a black/white more or less reductionist paradigm that has held sway for the last 4000 years of whatever in the main religions with 'tracer elements' of a more expansive view in the main religions' mystical expressions.

I think there is evidence that we have now outgrown this, or are doing so, and entering what one might term 'holographic spirituality' that encompasses a wider view. On this reading the figures of a given religion would appear as Jesus, Krishna or whoever to followers of that religion because that is a secondary form used to communicate an equivalent reality.

So when, say, a devout Christian monk in his cell historically glimpsed Jesus in Christian heaven and a yogi in India saw Vishnu they were in fact seeing the same thing. Just in a form they filter or find somehow most accessible for the 'message' to not be blurred or distorted if it were to be presented as something alien to their tradition.

Now if the veils are coming off in this period of history we may be starting to see 'what is behind the curtain'. Or part of what is behind the first curtain maybe.

There's another - more rational (hahah) reason I can think of too as to why "God might let a genuine Christian have such an experience": spiritual growth.

If you consider psychedelic or even therapeutic experiences that are ultimately healing or purging then there is always an element of extreme fear and what might initially be termed 'negativity' in the first stages until it is overcome. In Ayahuasca experiences for example, apparently, fears and negativity inherent in the individual are often presented to the percipient so that they may 'live through them' and move beyond them. Often it is not pleasant but is held by Shamans to be a 'gift from the Gods'. Very often it involves fear of death and conceptions of death and can sometimes even - as is the case with NDEs - result in the removal of any fear of death in subsequent life.

One might even say that the vast majority of mystical spirituality, chemical or otherwise, deals primarily with facing this issue of fear of death in some way. Not surprising really - most of our human endeavours do.

It is more a problem with modern (Western) Christianity that it seeks to avoid this 'facing death' - which ironically is the true redemptive experience - in fact, one could argue that this is what the 'Churchian' doctrine in fact is - a free ticket to 'heaven' by accepting that someone else vicariously took on all the experience of the fear of death for you.

They don't tell you of course that in accepting this you deprive yourself of the spiritual content and redemptive experience you could experience for yourself. It is a true Faustian pact.

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by segovius

And this is before we get anywhere near the suppression of the Gnostic Gospels (some of which are undoubtedly genuine), selection of the actual New Testament (some of which is undoubtedly adjusted by redactors) and later extraneous doctrine decided hundreds of years after the fact for political reasons.

What would you recommend as a good source of information what Jesus really taught? Are there any on-line souces?


Thanks,

[segovius]

Originally Posted by anonymous

What would you recommend as a good source of information what Jesus really taught? Are there any on-line souces?

It's difficult, most research on the net seems to end up at sites either Christian or atheist agenda-driven. I tend to be a book person more.

A book I like very much is Robin Lane Fox's "The Unauthorized Version" which pretty much lays out the state of scholarship (though might not be up to current trends) in an accessible way. It's a book I like to read once more every few years. He is an atheist but he's one of the very few I know who is a genuine objective scholar and has no axe to grind. He's an Oxford lecturer in religion who just happens to be an atheist and that's as far as it goes. Need more of that!

"The Nag Hammadi Library" is a good one if you're interested in the Gnostic Gospels though some of them are a bit off the wall, some have the flavour of being from the same source as the early tradition.

One that's a bit tangential but personally I think is very useful is "The Muslim Jesus" by Khalidi. It might seem odd to suggest it but it is a collection of sayings of Jesus that survived in the Muslim world and not in the West and hence is a repository (in some cases) of genuine traditions that we don't have. One of them is "Jesus said: become passers by" which I have always thought could come straight from the Gospels.

Another off the wall one is Jack Miles "Christ: A Crisis in the Life of God" - it's basically an assessment of Christ from the standpoint of literary criticism but it covers all the bases if you can read between the lines. His Pulitzer Prize winning "God: A Biography" is even better and one of my favourite books but it only deals with the Old Testament.

I am not sure if these are going to be helpful to you - I hope so. Maybe others have better suggestions?

Personally I try to avoid reading books that are stating other people's opinions but rather look for ones that are true to the facts but lay out a narrative which serves a non-religious or non-atheist agenda and that also make you think and arrive at your own conclusions rather than steer towards the authors. For sure all the above will do that!!

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by segovius

I am not sure if these are going to be helpful to you - I hope so. Maybe others have better suggestions?

Do you mind answering a few questions, based on your research of what Jesus really taught? (I'm interested here in what can be gleaned from what you would consider reliable documentary evidence not personal beliefs.) And, can you mention what sources you rely on for the answers? Also, I don't mean to ask you to go off an do a lot of research for this, if you don't know it off the top of your head I'll try to look at the sources you suggested above....

What did Jesus really have to say, if anything, about the following questions:

Who was Jesus? Was he the only son of God? If yes what does "son" really mean?

Are those who lack faith during life excluded from being "saved"? What does being saved mean?

Who gets to go to heaven? What do you have to do to get in?

Is asking for forgiveness required to get into heaven? Is asking for forgiveness all that is necessary to get into heaven?

Did Jesus's death purchase forgiveness for the sins all humankind?

Is the doctrine of the trinity correct? If yes what is the trinity?

Did he teach that those who are not saved will be damned eternally?

What was the core of his teaching?

How should people relate to each other?

How should people relate to God?

What happens after death? Do we sleep in our graves until he returns or does something else happen?


Thanks,

[segovius]

Originally Posted by anonymous

Do you mind answering a few questions, based on your research of what Jesus really taught? (I'm interested here in what can be gleaned from what you would consider reliable documentary evidence not personal beliefs.) And, can you mention what sources you rely on for the answers? Also, I don't mean to ask you to go off an do a lot of research for this, if you don't know it off the top of your head I'll try to look at the sources you suggested above....

Ok, no problem - could be very interesting but perhaps we should do it in a new thread as it is probably not appropriate and bad form to do it here.

I can start one if you like but it will be about half an hour. Maybe you could open a new one with those questions if you like meantime and everyone can give some opinions on them too.

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by anonymous

What would you recommend as a good source of information what Jesus really taught? Are there any on-line souces?


Thanks,

Remember, I was a Christian until age 20 (40 odd years ago).

My impression was and is that the Gospels present an almost Marxist point of view - focused on inequalities and the needs of the poor. That seems to have morphed beyond recognition, so you see the Pope riding in golden splendour, with a Vatican involved in all sorts of commercial activities. Conversely, the Gospels say remarkably little about sexual 'sin', which has become very important in the eyes of many modern Christians.

Of course, even the Gospels were written down decades after Jesus' death, so even those may well be distortions - but you can clearly see the distortion that has gone on since that time.

David

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by Gizmo

The term 'atheist,' has a bad rap. Everyone who is non-theist (not believing in a separate, outside force called God) does not subscribe, necessarily, to the materialist point of view.

I believe it is possible to be incredibly spiritual in nature and hold the belief, not of a separate god, but of a connectedness both in and around us. Is this atheism? Technically. No God.

All the term 'atheism' really gives us is what someone doesn't believe in, not what additional beliefs they might hold.

Yes - this is really important. Atheism can be no more than a recognition that organised religious movements don't last - they merge with politics, and morph beyond recognition. Maybe that makes us agnostic, but there are so many possibilities, and not enough words to cover them all:

1) Actual belief that god(s) don't exist.

2) Belief that society destroys spiritual experience, so that it is impossible to know if gods exist, or how they should be defined, if they do!

3) Personal uncertainty that might be resolved as life goes on.

4) Belief that nobody knows enough to say if god(s) exist.

etc.

I felt Michael Heiser was struggling with the limits of Christianity - completely trying to square the circle. Alex pushed him, but he seemed to put up a strange straw man - that those interested in the paranormal might want to argue with Jesus about who he had let into heaven!

Perhaps he knew he would get demonised by Christians if he went any further!

David