Ep. 101: The problem of suffering

[mitchellmckain]

A good guesser?

Is God a good guesser? Of course He is. Apparently it bothers some like Tony to think that God could do things like making guesses, taking risks, making sacrifices, or imposing limits on Himself. But it seems that you absolutely must choose between two options.
1. Impose theological limits on what God can do in order to make Him fit absolute definitions the way that Tony does.
2. Or accept that God can impose limits on Himself according to His own choices.
Well limits upon God according to His own choices does not make Him less in my eyes but rather more -- much more. That just gives Him things that Tony's God could never have, like character, integrity and the ability to love others.

And a non-infinite god?

Nope. I believe in an infinite God. Yes, that means a God without limits. But as discussed above, there is a question of where you are going to place this lack of limitation. Do you render God static, lifeless and impotent by making this lack of limitation your definition of Him so He is incapable of doing anything which your definiton does not allow, or do you put the lack of limitation where it belongs in His own will to choose whatever actions He might want to take including any limitations He might want to impose upon Himself. No I believe in a God who is infinite in Himself in His own will rather than just in some theological definition.

Well honestly, I didn't think you would concede to such an anthropomorphic demi-god sort of character, but now that you have:

There is nothing anthropomorphic about a God who transends the limits of singular personhood -- a being with no limits upon what He can do or know or be. But in rejecting the anthropomorphic God will you like Tony choose something that is less than human and incapable of even doing the things that human beings can do or will you choose something that is far greater, capable of doing all that human beings can do and much much more.

1. He's not supreme, so I have no obligation to worship him or even recognize any authority from him

Tony's God, who has to be in absolute control of everything whether He wants to or not, does not sound supreme to me but impotent and inanimate. For the God I believe in, the supremacy is in God's will and not in Tony's theological definitions. Thus the God I believe in can choose to create things that He does not control but which have a free will of their own. This is a God ruled by love rather than power. This is no control freak power monger made in the image of those who use religion as a tool of power -- obsessed with rights to your obedience, but a God that inspires worship rather than one who demands it.

2. If he's "guessing" that means he could guess wrong, and I need to see some evidence that I should bet my eternity on some superman character who could be wrong in how I am to be disposed after I die

Yes, when one makes a guess then one can be wrong, when one takes risks then one can be disappointed, when one loves someone else then one can be rejected, and when one creates living things with a free will of their own then they can choose evil.

Yes there are those who hide from the chances of life by making no guesses, taking no risks, loving nobody but themselves and allowing no life in their existence. And when they do, it is they themselves who have chosen the nature of their own existence, whether it be now in the physical or afterwards in the spirit, for hell is the existence of those who hide from life and choose death.

Is there any biblical support for this entity or is this your own personal view of god?

Yes, the God that I describe is the one that is actually in the Bible rather than the product of theological definitions.

"The the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and tht every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth and He was grieved in His heart." Genesis 6

"When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God repented of the evil which he had said he would do to them; and he did not do it." Jonah 3

4. How does such a being even matter in terms of providing "purpose"?

There are those who believe that God can only make machines and tools created for an end, but I believe that God can create living things and children created as an end in themselves, who can choose for themselves what to do with the life that has been given to them. So all through the Old Testament, God says, "I set before you life and death, therefore choose life." He tells us to embrace the life that He has given us with all of its guesses and risks just as God has done and to give of ourselves in love to others even though we may be rejected and hurt because that is where life is and to hide from the possibility of disappointment or being wrong is to hide from life itself and thus to choose death over life.

5. Are we just a lab experiment to him?

No. He is not a detached observer where what He wants does not matter. He is intimately involved and makes what He wants in all of this abundantly clear. He wants us to embrace the goodness of the life He has given us and when we choose evil and death He is "grieved in His heart."

6. Now we have a problem of suffering because who is this clown that he should allow this level of pain, and where are his morals? Who made him king? Or is he merely a bully?

I have often heard children yelling that their mommy and daddy are being bad when they don't give them what they want. They call them all sorts of names and heap all sorts of ridicule upon them. This is the risk that is found in love. You can give all your heart, mind and soul to do what is best for the one you love and they can reward you with hatred, contempt and rejection. But less childish observers can often see quite clearly the self-serving whining of the child compared to the patient and humble service of the parent.

7. Hey, maybe he's just some kick back entity with hands tied, and in the end I still don't need religion, belief, Jesus, or any of this because it doesn't matter. when I meet him, we'll talk then. Until then, someone has to take a stand about the people who do so many crazy things in his name.

Yes, that is the mandate of life -- to stand up for what you believe no matter what the risks. To cower under the intellectual blackmail of the legalistic religionists is not what I can possibly call life. No. Life demands that we pursue truth wherever it takes us and have faith that any God worthy of the title can appreciate our sincerety and find a way to help us achieve our goals if they are truly worthwhile - and I cannot imagine many goals that are more worthwhile than the truth.

(By the way-- do other people know that this entity is just guessing his way through all this?)

The guesses of science are far more certain that the absolute assertions of legalistic religionists, and the guess of God are far more certain than that. But when it comes to anticipating the choices of those with authentic free will then anyone can be wrong, but God who knows us far better than anyone including ourselves is wrong far less often than anyone else.

[Dr Mundo]

Mitch I have always said that your Idea of God is a far kinder, more loving God than that of traditional Christianity, I still see no evidence for this God and I have a few issues with your responses;

... but a God that inspires worship rather than one who demands it.

I agree that A God who inspires worship would be more moral/loving than one who demands it. But how do you make sense of this:

"You shall have no other gods before me."
"You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
"You shall not misuse the name of the LORD, your God."
"Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy."

Yes, the God that I describe is the one that is actually in the Bible rather than the product of theological definitions.

"The the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and tht every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth and He was grieved in His heart." Genesis 6

And then he Killed them all, well over 99% of them at least.
That is what is in the Bible, While I am on your side against the people in religions, like Tony and Mikes, I think they are more Biblicaly grounded in their beliefs about the Christian God than you are.

[gary_s]

Mitch's concept of god is about the only one I've heard that makes any sense. Not that he's recruiting; I know that isn't the case. But at least I can discuss that version of god with a straight face and with warmth in my heart. Let's just hope he's right.

[tonyenglish7]

Ant<

Pity he wasn't able to consult you before, say, trying to get Adam & Eve not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge or convince Pharaoh to let the Israelites go with all manner of plague, pestilence and even the angel of death, aye?

Yes all of these did it via their own decision, yet God raised Pharaoh up for that reason as it is reported in the bible. He knew what he and every other free will being would do given any particular situation. Remember, God still is an active player, it is not all just foreknowledge, he gets to play with the parts as well..

[tonyenglish7]

Ant,

The thing you're neglecting though, is that, according to Tony, your god has seen all the possible universes and chosen to activate this one. So, it's not about him being really, really good at anticipating our choices, it's about having locked us into our choices (by activating this universe). This potentially means that in another universe I could have turned out to be an awesome Christian (and destined to eternal life) but I'm locked out of that possibility because in that universe Hitler would have won the war and a helluva lot less Christians would have existed to be saved when your god returns to cleanse the earth with fire (seeing as cleansing it with water ((aka: the flood)) didn't turn out to be as brilliant an idea as your god thought it would be)...

You misunderstand, it is not about locking us into our choices, we are still just as free as we are free. Just because God knew and activated the universe doesn't mean you are not free. The freedom you have is real no matter what God knew prior. I am not convinced that any other universe would contain the same persons. In any other universe, no matter how slightly different, the alternative universe seems to me to preclude any identical persons, but who knows?

But it is true, that the bad that comes from a rebellious temporal free agent doesn't compare to the incommensurate good that comes from a redeemed person eternally knowing and enjoying God. The difference is eternal and cannot be compared. If you freely choose to be the black pixels in the flat screen, you make the goodness of the white pixels possible. Why should a rebellious and defiant person make it impossible for a broken and humble person to obtain the knowledge and relationship with God?

[mitchellmckain]

Mitch I have always said that your Idea of God is a far kinder, more loving God than that of traditional Christianity

Kinder? NOT AT ALL! Far far from it. My "idea of God" is the one who created life through the process of evolution and that is a process that is frankly rather ruthless. Our comfort is not God's priority and suffering is a scalpel which He uses quite frequently and liberally. But yes the reason for all of this is love.

I have a few issues with your responses;

... but a God that inspires worship rather than one who demands it.

I agree that A God who inspires worship would be more moral/loving than one who demands it. But how do you make sense of this:

"You shall have no other gods before me."
"You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
"You shall not misuse the name of the LORD, your God."
"Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy."

A parent will lay down rules for his child, like do not go in the street, promising whatever punishment for doing so that will make the child pay attention to it. But children grow up and the rules change, one day they are ready to go out in street and all the terrible threats of the parent from when they were young no longer apply. There is a stage in childhood development when the parent must command respect and must demand the child's obedience for the child's own safety. But when the child grows up things change a great deal, don't they? Our relationship with God is that of parent and child and we are talking about a parent who raised us up from the muck through the process of evolution over the last few billion years. These are commands that were given 3200 years ago, and although some people still find some meaning to these, circumstances have change enormously and they certainly do not mean what they once did.

Yes, the God that I describe is the one that is actually in the Bible rather than the product of theological definitions.
"The the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and tht every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth and He was grieved in His heart." Genesis 6

And then he Killed them all, well over 99% of them at least.

Yep. We are speaking of the creator of all living things and according to the theory of evolution, such near extinction events is exactly what the creation of life requires. I certainly think that this was the only solution to problem he was faced with. But far from being a solution that appealed to God, he made it quite clear that he would never allow us to put him in that position again and so he made some rather radical changes to the world. You might ask why he did not do such things to begin with and the answer is that these changes, far from being optimal are actually rather unpleasant.

That is what is in the Bible, While I am on your side against the people in religions, like Tony and Mikes, I think they are more Biblicaly grounded in their beliefs about the Christian God than you are.

Of course you do. Not only was this the way that you were taught to understand the Bible, but it is rather obvious that you are not in the least bit interested in finding value in the Bible. You are only interested in repudiating its value and thus it is only the most absurd, contradictory and appalling understanding of the Bible that serves your interests.

[Dr Mundo]

Kinder? NOT AT ALL! Far far from it. My "idea of God" is the one who created life through the process of evolution and that is a process that is frankly rather ruthless. Our comfort is not God's priority and suffering is a scalpel which He uses quite frequently and liberally. But yes the reason for all of this is love.

Fair enough Mitch, I accept and respect your position there. I do not however share that position with you. The good thing is for your relationship with me that is not an issue. You don't think I deserve to be tortured in hell forever, and you are not trying to coax that religion onto me or try to pass creationism onto the classroom curriculum. I don't have any issues with your beliefs about your God only that I don't see the evidence for it. But Its not a big issue, at least not one worth fighting it out at the polls over.

A parent will lay down rules for his child, like do not go in the street, promising whatever punishment for doing so that will make the child pay attention to it. But children grow up and the rules change, one day they are ready to go out in street and all the terrible threats of the parent from when they were young no longer apply. There is a stage in childhood development when the parent must command respect and must demand the child's obedience for the child's own safety. But when the child grows up things change a great deal, don't they? Our relationship with God is that of parent and child and we are talking about a parent who raised us up from the muck through the process of evolution over the last few billion years. These are commands that were given 3200 years ago, and although some people still find some meaning to these, circumstances have change enormously and they certainly do not mean what they once did.

Well I am glad you see it that way. Its a shame more Christians in the states don't. You would probably be surprised to learn how many people wont vote for a president if she/he didn't profess to be a Christian. They don't see those commands as having changed much. You need to be a follower of Jesus and believe in the bible or else. That is what one of my biggest problems with that type of thinking is.

Yep. We are speaking of the creator of all living things and according to the theory of evolution, such near extinction events is exactly what the creation of life requires.

The creation of life requires, for other lives to be destroyed because they misbehaved? What do you mean by the creation of life? The upkeep of life, maybe? Either way that sounds a bit harsh to me. I don't fault the system of natural selection for being so unemotionally attached to, or caring for the suffering/death of specific animals. Its just a natural system. However when conscious minds are involved, Minds such as ours with the ability for compassion and empathy, Such extreme cases of near extinction events would be horrific and avoided if possible.

Of course you do. Not only was this the way that you were taught to understand the Bible,

I will be very honest with you and let you know that almost all of the knowledge I have about the bible 89% or more, came after I became an atheist. So my understanding of the Bible was very limited when I did believe. Only after I started reading it for myself did I come away with the view of it that I have. My parents, family, and pastors didn't have much of an influence on me with regards to how I feel about the bible now.

but it is rather obvious that you are not in the least bit interested in finding value in the Bible. You are only interested in repudiating its value and thus it is only the most absurd, contradictory and appalling understanding of the Bible that serves your interests.

Or maybe that is just the way I see it honestly. When it talks about the actions that God is doing and the commands to love him or be forever damned. When it talks about the nonbelievers as Goats, and the followers of Christ as the pure sheep. I come away with a distinct message that is, Be christian, love Jesus, follow Gods commandments, OR ELSE. I do not posses the skills necessary to make the bible say what I want it to say. I just read it, disagree with it, and tell people why I do. Is that fair of me to say Mitch?

[mitchellmckain]

You would probably be surprised to learn how many people wont vote for a president if she/he didn't profess to be a Christian.

I was here when people voted for Bush Jr. because he was their kind of moron. How should I be surprised?

They don't see those commands as having changed much. You need to be a follower of Jesus and believe in the bible or else. That is what one of my biggest problems with that type of thinking is.

Sure, but you know that I have a problem with that type of thinking also. And so I criticize it visciously and some would say even more effectively because I do so from the stance of seeing the value of Christianity and embracing it.

The creation of life requires, for other lives to be destroyed because they misbehaved?

The creation of life is a developmental process and that development only happens when there are severe challenges to survival. This reminds me of the film "The Day the Earth Stood Still" with Keanu Reves.

What do you mean by the creation of life? The upkeep of life, maybe? Either way that sounds a bit harsh to me.

Yes the requirements of life are harsh indeed.

I don't fault the system of natural selection for being so unemotionally attached to, or caring for the suffering/death of specific animals. Its just a natural system. However when conscious minds are involved, Minds such as ours with the ability for compassion and empathy, Such extreme cases of near extinction events would be horrific and avoided if possible.

Yes indeed. But the fact is that if God does exist and he did play a role in that process then it requires him to be harsh and ruthless or life just doesn't develop.

When it talks about the nonbelievers as Goats, and the followers of Christ as the pure sheep. I come away with a distinct message that is, Be christian, love Jesus, follow Gods commandments, OR ELSE. I do not posses the skills necessary to make the bible say what I want it to say. I just read it, disagree with it, and tell people why I do. Is that fair of me to say Mitch?

And I have to tell you the same thing that I have to tell every fundie Christian trying to push their view of the Bible that they are being selective in the parts of the Bible that they are paying attention to and making significant in their process of interpreting it. To put it simply, you see what want to see, no different than they do.

Let's take this matter of goat and sheep and read the whole thing in context Matthew 25:31-46.

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

So WHERE does it say that the goats are the atheists and that the sheep are the Christians? What! Its not there! So where in the world did that come from? It came from you. You put it in there. Maybe it is because the legalistic power monger Xtians you grew up among put that into your head. I don't know. But whatever, it isn't there in the Bible itself.

So what is there? The goats and sheep are there to be sure and they will be seperated, because there will be a judgement. That certainly is in the Bible. The Bible is definitely saying that everybody is not ok. But why are some people not ok? What is the basis of judgement given there? Is it the "suck ups" that are ok and the honest folk who speak their mind who are in trouble? Not according to what I see all througout the Bible. According to this passage, God apparently identifies with every person that needs help and as you treated them so God feels that you have treated Him, and THAT is the basis of judgement as Jesus explains it.

Now the question is whether this can actually be the basis of natural consequences rather than a being who feels some need to torment those who dare to disregard fundie Christian dictates? If we consider the nature of place that is populated by those who help people in need as a opposed to a place where people care nothing for others, then it is easy to see that the natural consequences alone are sufficient to make the place where such people are found into a heaven or a hell.

[Dr Mundo]

So WHERE does it say that the goats are the atheists and that the sheep are the Christians? What! Its not there! So where in the world did that come from? It came from you. You put it in there. Maybe it is because the legalistic power monger Xtians you grew up among put that into your head. I don't know. But whatever, it isn't there in the Bible itself.

You are right, in that passage its not. It looks as though its talking to people who don't help out there fellow humans, Whether they be Christian or not, its trying to promote helpful actions. If we have to nit pick though, the way it encourages those actions is still horrid. Just for not giving someone a sweater, visiting someone in jail, or feeding the hungry, you will suffer in the lake of fire made for the fallen angles? I mean i agree that those things are good. But they should only be done if someone chooses to do so. Not out of treats of punishment. I have often done those things, to complete strangers, And I do it because I would rather live in a world in which people want to. It makes me feel good to know I helped someone. I don't think we need this whole treat of punishment for people to do good things.

You are right though, I misspoke about the Goats. I don't know if i could find anything to link Goats to non believers. If you like I will stop commenting on the Bible, for one I don't care if it has some nice things, some bad things, some smart things, or some stupid things. I just don't see any good reason to think that there is such a thing as any of the God concepts that people have here in the forums and elsewhere. Also mine is starting to gather dust now on my head board, and I have no real interest at this time to crack it open again. So to be fair I will stay out of any bible conversations, I am far from a Bible expert and also I don't care to be one.

As for the rest of your post, Like I said. I think you have a better version of God than other people do, there are others who have a better one than you, (better as in one that is more moral as far as I can tell). Regardless of what my emotional assessment of the God concepts there are out there, I think It's like talking about which one of the seven dwarfs is cooler to be around. I don't have any good reason to think either of the two claims are relating to anything in the real world.

[bebop88]

Mitch,

Dr Mundo wrote:That is what is in the Bible, While I am on your side against the people in religions, like Tony and Mikes, I think they are more Biblicaly grounded in their beliefs about the Christian God than you are.

Of course you do. Not only was this the way that you were taught to understand the Bible, but it is rather obvious that you are not in the least bit interested in finding value in the Bible. You are only interested in repudiating its value and thus it is only the most absurd, contradictory and appalling understanding of the Bible that serves your interests

How do you know that other individuals have a “most absurd, contradictory and appalling understanding of the Bible”?

To any theists---How do you know that other have a wrong understading of the Bible? Why is it important to have a proper understanding of the Bible?

[yjoeyh]

To any theists---How do you know that others have a wrong understading of the Bible? Why is it important to have a proper understanding of the Bible?

I think this question also applies to atheist just as mush as it does to theists. Considering that, the answer is pretty obvious. The Bible has a huge impact on humanity. Huge numbers of people use it as a guide for the way they live their lives and the way they impact the world around them. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Either way, it seems a pretty good reason to think it is important to have a 'proper' understanding of it... what it is... why it is... and what we should make of it ourselves. That goes for the theist and the atheist. That's why we are both in these forums.

[bebop88]

Joey

bebop88 wrote:To any theists---How do you know that others have a wrong understading of the Bible? Why is it important to have a proper understanding of the Bible?

I think this question also applies to atheist just as mush as it does to theists. Considering that, the answer is pretty obvious. The Bible has a huge impact on humanity. Huge numbers of people use it as a guide for the way they live their lives and the way they impact the world around them. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Either way, it seems a pretty good reason to think it is important to have a 'proper' understanding of it... what it is... why it is... and what we should make of it ourselves. That goes for the theist and the atheist. That's why we are both in these forums.

I like that response, though you missed the first question.

So what if my understanding of the Bible as an atheist leads me to the conclusion that no matter my good deeds, I will be punished for not believing in God. Is that a proper understanding of the Bible?

Also, there are other Holy books do you suggest we have a proper understanding of those books as well?

[mitchellmckain]

Whether they be Christian or not, its trying to promote helpful actions. If we have to nit pick though, the way it encourages those actions is still horrid. Just for not giving someone a sweater, visiting someone in jail, or feeding the hungry, you will suffer in the lake of fire made for the fallen angles? I mean i agree that those things are good. But they should only be done if someone chooses to do so. Not out of threats of punishment.

No that is not what it is trying to do. What you say here is in fact a common topic of Christian sermons -- one about people trying to earn their way to heaven by good works. No in this passage, Jesus is speaking to the religious of the times, who think that they are sitting pretty because they suck up to God, and thus to those who say they love God, it informs them about what God really cares about. But ultimately, I think the point here is that your attitudes towards other people have long term consequences regarding the kind of existence you going to experience.

I have often done those things, to complete strangers, And I do it because I would rather live in a world in which people want to. It makes me feel good to know I helped someone. I don't think we need this whole treat of punishment for people to do good things.

Yes and that has been the basis of my argument why many atheists are better "Christians" than those who call themselves by that name. Because what God is interested is not the suck up religionists to try to manipulate Him (gain His favor) by doing things for Him, but precisely in those who do what is good and right for its own sake (have the "law of God" written on their hearts).

---------------------------

How do you know that other individuals have a “most absurd, contradictory and appalling understanding of the Bible”?

I know what they say, just the same as you do. And I find what they say absurd, contradictory and appalling just the same as you. The difference is application. I simply say that this explanation of the Bible that they have made is absurd, contradictory and appalling. I DON'T use it as an excuse to ridicule and condemn an entire group of people just in order to justify my own subjective opinions.

To any theists---How do you know that other have a wrong understading of the Bible? Why is it important to have a proper understanding of the Bible?

How do you know that others have a wrong understanding of anything? Well obviously it is because you think that your understanding makes a great deal more sense in light of the facts.

Why is it important to have a proper understanding of anything? Probably because you sound like a real imbecile when you sound off about something even though you don't understand what you are talking about.

[cleve]

... I misspoke about the Goats.
... or maybe that is just the way I see it honestly.

Doc,
Now maybe you can see a little as to why religion tries to see matters as honestly as possible; but at the same time, because of its human features, religion too is in the process of learning/ attempting to learn how to interpret the meaning of scriptures more precisely. Rather than a doctrinal center of instruction, religion needs to be viewed more as a cozy type place for individuals to learn together about life. Don't people have a right to learn where they are comfortable with their own kind and try to figure out why they were blessed with life?

When it talks about the actions that God is doing and the commands to love him or be forever damned. When it talks about the nonbelievers as Goats, and the followers of Christ as the pure sheep. I come away with a distinct message that is, Be christian, love Jesus, follow Gods commandments, OR ELSE. I do not posses the skills necessary to make the bible say what I want it to say. I just read it, disagree with it, and tell people why I do. Is that fair of me to say?

Your response to reading the bible in a "religious" manner is no different from others and myself, who often read their bible in such a fashion.
(From taking the section in Matt. 25 where the situation you referred to is cited ...) At the time Christ made the speech to them, the sheep were representative of/symbolized the nation of Israel, and the goats were representative of non-residents of Israel living outside the "Holy Land" at that time. (At that point in time, Jesus seemed to be referring to both present and future matters to the nations - Israel and Gentile nations of that time .) Using this setting of time and location for the speech, the contextual message was that if the nations didn't try to improve the civility and respect of relationships between one another, they could expect judgment from Him as a result. Perhaps this latter segment about relationships between nations could also apply to the present days and future. (Of course, as you probably already understand from personal experience, all interpretation is subject to human opinion. All of us humans think and know in part at this segment of our journey. That includes human speculation as if the terms "goats" and "nations" could be combined into the term "goat nations" - especially since both terms are used in the same segment of scripture. And this is why we have religion - and this discussion board.)

[Keep The Reason]

To any theists---How do you know that others have a wrong understading of the Bible? Why is it important to have a proper understanding of the Bible?

I think this question also applies to atheist just as mush as it does to theists. Considering that, the answer is pretty obvious. The Bible has a huge impact on humanity. Huge numbers of people use it as a guide for the way they live their lives and the way they impact the world around them. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Either way, it seems a pretty good reason to think it is important to have a 'proper' understanding of it... what it is... why it is... and what we should make of it ourselves. That goes for the theist and the atheist. That's why we are both in these forums.

We could say the same thing about the Gita, the Upanishads, the Qu'ran. But those "sacred" texts are given short shrift as if the only real maketplace of spiritual ideals resides in the bible.

Theists: how many of you have spent the same or even half the effort on understanding the Qu'ran or Bhagavad Gita as you have the bible?