Well then you wouldn't know it until you're dead, would you? I mean, imagine some atheist trips into lowering the defenses of his mind to a demon. What is that demon going to do?

He COULD take that atheist on a spin, corrupting his life with wicked drives and a series of unlikely but horrible events, causing that poor atheist a lifetime of suffering and suffering to all those around him until his eventual death

OR

He could play it cool, because the last thing we need is for some statisticians to notice that people who play Ouija boards and White Wolf generally have terrible lives and are constantly cursed, which of course would become strong evidence for the reality of Satan and God, ultimately driving people to cling a little closer to their faith. Or even just on the individual level, an atheist who even slightly suspects he is followed by a supernatural being will reconsider his position and perhaps even convert in order to set his mind at rest. Ultimately, the atheists soul is then stolen from Satan's grasp; a short-term gain for a long-term loss.

Instead, the rational decision is to leave the atheist alone; perhaps even give him minor blessings. Swarm him with demons, but leave him unharmed. Help him avoid any sort of calamity that may drive him to reconsider. Instead, present minor distractions and pleasures to keep him placated ... until the fateful day that he expires. Only then does Satan collect debts owed.

(I suppose the tl;dr of it is: if we accept demons are real and intelligent, with a long-game mentality, as an atheist you shouldn't worry that buying a game book will have any real influence on your vulnerability to supernatural powers.)

Okay, thanks. That does make sense.

Hmm. You know, I've actually been very lucky lately! Now I'm starting to worry...

If the demons are going to get to you through the book (in other words - those other folks are right) then there are a whole lot of MUCH worse things to worry about (like being eternally tortured in a literal conscious hell)

Yeah, I'd have to agree with Doulos on this one.  If the religious folks are right, then buying a book about demons is way down the list in terms of things you need to worry about!  The punishment for being a demon-summoner is the same as being a upright, nice-to-everybody non-believer: eternal torture in hell.

That said, if something makes you uncomfortable, it might be good to stay away from it, just for your own emotional/mental well-being.  Your fear might be irrational, but that doesn't mean it's not actually a fear.  And if you'll be losing sleep over it, or feeling guilty or whatever, that all might outweigh whatever enjoyment you might get out of the book.  The flip side of this is that perhaps this would be a way to overcome an irrational fear.

A third angle is that some people will likely judge you negatively for reading such a book.  If there are any people whose opinion you care about that fall into that category (religious grandparents, say), then again it might not be worth the hassle just to get some entertaining reading.  And again, the flipside might be that you could maybe use this to change some people's minds and get them to realize that reading fiction about demons doesn't make demons appear any more than reading fiction about jedis doesn't make jedis appear (though, I honestly wouldn't hold out a ton of hope on changing anyone's minds).

So basically, I don't think there's any reason to fear demons if you buy/read this book.  But there might be other reasons to avoid it.  Depends on how much entertainment it'll bring you, and how much stress you're willing to put up with to get it.

You're clumping every religious person in the world into one large, prejudicial generalization.  Maybe "religious zealots" or even "bible thumpers" would at least bring down the number somewhat.  :)

In reply to Heath (msg # 219):

I dunno, actually.  Even the most open-minded of religious people tend to think that what you believe is more important than what you read/buy, I'd say.  I think the idea that being an atheist leads to a worse afterlife is accepted by pretty much all major religious groups that I can think of, with exception of budhist perhaps (and even for them I'd say my statement above holds).  To a degree, the less zealous the religious person in question, the more true the statement would be (since they'd tend not to look as harshly on what books you read, and be more concerned about "more important" stuff).

To clarify, I didn't mean that statement as some dig at religious people, zealots or otherwise.  The sentence that followed it was specific to mainstream christian religions, granted, but they tend to be the ones that think demons exist.

To put it another way, are there some religions where, if they're correct, reading this book is really more of a problem than being an atheist?

I admit that I try not to buy into the mindset that being an atheist makes me a damned person... Somehow, my vision of Christian God is that he's a loving begin. So, I kind of count of being spared from hell based on my good deeds and intentions... if it turns out that hell is real, that is.

And to clarify something: I'm not scared of the punishment for reading that WW book. I don't think that it's that important bad deed... I'm more scared of demons being drawn to me and causing harm to me.

Has anyone here seen Exorcism of Emily Rose? That movie totally scared me. I do hope things like that aren't real...

This is not the LDS belief, nor is it likely to be the religious dogma of most of Christianity, at the deepest level.

For example, why do Christians believe Satan became the devil?  It is not because he is the most evil per se.  It is because he had all the promises, exchanged promises with God, and then reneged on them, spat upon them, and became an angel that was cast down.  He could never become the "devil" if (1) He did not believe and revile God, and (2) he did not rise to a high enough level of prominence to be able to be cast down so low.

So it's kind of the theory of the bigger they are, the harder they fall.  Atheists cannot be cast down as far because they never rose up enough, but they also cannot share in salvation.  So if anything, they are middle of the road as to their eternal judgment.

In reply to Heath (msg # 222):

I thought the LDS view was that pretty much no one goes to "hell", but that there are three layers of "heaven", and that atheists end up in the bottom one (don't rise high in your way of putting it).  I thought to get above the lowest level of heaven you had to do stuff which you'd only do if you believed in God (e.g., make convenants with him, worship him, take part in sacraments, etc.)

...Doing a bit of wiki-reading, it sounds like atheists end up in either the middle or the bottom heaven, depending on if they accept christianity in the afterlife.  But I think that still seems to imply that being an atheist leads to a worse afterlife than you would otherwise have according to LDS beliefs.  A good, honest, upright atheist who accepts christianity in the afterlife gets to level 2 of heaven.  A good, honest, upright christian gets to go to level 1 (or at least has the chance to).

I see that you're saying that to get the totally worst afterlife of all you need to believe in God and then actively decide you don't like Him, but that's sort of tangential to what I'm saying.  Regardless of whether being an atheist leads to the absolute worst afterlife or not (according or LDS beliefs), it does lead to a worse one than an otherwise-equal believer would get (according to LDS beliefs).

To turn it around a bit, if what I'm saying doesn't accurately reflect LDS beliefs, that seems to imply that faith has no bearing on one's afterlife (according to LDS beliefs).  Or, put another way, if one is no worse off in the afterlife for being an atheist, then it follows that one is no better off for being a devout follower of the religion either.  It would seem odd that religion would send people out as missionaries to win converts if they didn't feel like changing peoples beliefs was important, no?  I feel like perhaps you think I'm making a stronger claim than I'm actually intending here.  I really don't feel like what I'm saying should be all that controversial.

To bring it back to the original point, are you saying that the LDS belief would be that reading this roleplaying book about demons would have more impact on a person's afterlife than will whether they believe in God or not?  Would you rather one of your kids stopped being a Mormon, or read this book?

[by the by, I'm going away on holiday soon, and probably won't get a chance to post for two weeks or so, so if I don't reply to any messages for a long time, that's why]

Let me clarify.  There are three "levels" of heaven in the LDS belief, and one "hell" that is outside of those (called "outer darkness").  The three kingdoms are all kingdoms of "glory" but differ in their brightness, as typically exemplified by the brightness of the stars compared to the moon, and the moon as to the sun.  This comparison comes from 1 Corinthians 15:41:

"There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory."

Only those who rejected God's plan and did not get bodies are relegated to outer darkness, including the devil and his ilk.  Everyone else got physical bodies and will therefore get resurrected.  Which of the three kingdoms you go to depends on which type of resurrected body you get at the time of judgment.

The three levels of salvation include the Telestial, Terrestrial and Celestial.  The Telestial is the lowest (the stars), and it is often compared to earth life.  Some say even the Telestial Kingdom is so wonderful that people would commit suicide to go there.  It is the level where people go who do not accept Jesus as their savior (in this life or in the time leading up to Judgment).

The terrestrial includes those who accepted Jesus and his atoning sacrifice but either were sinners or did not partake of the saving ordinances (baptism by someone with authority, etc.).

The celestial kingdom is for those who accepted Jesus, partook of the saving ordinances, and lived faithful and good lives.  The highest level of the celestial kingdom is for those who also partook of eternal marriage and who can become eternal creators like God.

_____

So, yes, I guess "hell" was being used generically above, though outer darkness would be considered hell in LDS thought.  But anyone of us here on earth are essentially guaranteed not to wind up there.

There is also a place called "spirit prison" and "paradise."  These are the two places you go after you die.  Those who were baptized and accepted Jesus on earth go to paradise, and the rest go to spirit prison, which is similar to the "hell" sometimes thought of (though without Satan or fire).  Those in paradise go down and minister to those in spirit prison, and if they accept the saving ordinances and Jesus in spirit prison, they can go to paradise and fix any problems and repent before Judgment.

So it is much more complicated than saying "heaven" or "hell" in the LDS viewpoint.

I wasn't commenting on the original point.  It's not the reading of a book but the impact the book has on a person, that person's beliefs, and that person's behaviors.  Obviously, some books can have such an effect just by being read (such as the psychological effects of pornography), but this would need to be examined on a case by case basis.

Thanks for everyone's input so far.

Here's an extra-paranoid question for everyone: what if demons do exist, but they don't behave strictly to Christian ideas about demons? Meaning, they exist, but aren't what Christianity believes them to be? Maybe I've watched too much of X-Files, but what if Christian God doesn't exist, but there are some malevolent spiritual entities..?

As I said, I know it's uber-paranoid, but that's the problem with being an agnostic: everything is, in theory, possible...

If you're reading a book about Christian demons and Christianity is wrong, then the real demons aren't going to take the book seriously, either.

Well, as far as I know, Inferno is about demons in general, not only Christian demons... Demons in NWoD aren't tied specifically to Christianity, although they fit the general mold of "evil spirits from a dark place".

That's a lot of what ifs based on air.  Not sure why it would bother you at all since it has as much chance as an invisible internet god that infests your mind every time you go online.

If it bothers you don't get the book, but if you're going to play a what-if game on no evidence then you should probably curl up in the corner and be terrified of anything you or anyone else can possibly imagine.

On a related note, the Pope says of atheists "God forgives those who follow their conscience."

http://the-view-from-rome.blog...he-pope/?ref=HRER3-1

That's a bit how my life looks like right now, admittedly... :(



Yay! :)

I agree.  But the fact remains that ultimately the necessary ordinances for salvation still remain necessary (baptism, etc.), even if they are accepted after the forgiveness takes place.

Forgiveness does not equate to rising to one's spiritual potential. You can be forgiven for getting bad grades, and even make up classes, but that don't mean yer gettin into Harvard.  :)

I have to admit that one of the great things about the LDS faith is that it's no lose.  I can ignore the existence of it my entire life, but at the end if it turns out to be the winner then I get to reap the benefits anyways ;)

Sort of like having the lottery numbers be drawn for my by default at the end even if I never bother to play the game!

Actually, that would just put you in the Terrestrial Kingdom, not the highest kingdom, assuming you lived a good life.

It's more along the lines of you get out of it what you put into it.  If you want to go to Harvard, there's a lot of work that goes into getting there, but there's a lot of reward.  If you're happy working at McDonald's, then you can be happy doing that work.  So your statement is not exactly correct unless you're the kind of guy who doesn't care to meet his potential and is happy with something less than the best.

Sure, if you believe it's true then that makes sense.

From a risk assessment standpoint, it would make more sense to try and follow at least one of the religions that threatens hell, because the consequences for being wrong there are MUCH higher.

The consequences for being wrong about the LDS faith?  A slightly less fancy eternity.  I could totally live with that.  Burning in conscuious torment for all of eternity on the other hand...

My guess is that strictly from an endgame perspective, becoming a follow of Islam is maybe the smartest.  At least in Christianity you have some growing beliefs of annihilationism, or universalism in there.  I'm not aware of those beliefs being a part of the Islamic faith, though I really could be wrong (in fact I suspect I probably am).

I know Buddhism has a sort of hell for the very worst, though the chance of the regular folk going there are pretty slim, and even then you'll eventually find your way out of there, though it could take a REAL long time.

Purely from a logical and endgame perspective, the LDS faith is way down the list.  Of course there is the whole 'But it's true!' part, but I'm not really dealing with that perspective here :)

From a logic perspective, the LDS church is the only one that makes absolute sense to me.  I find that those who don't share that view often simply don't know enough about it.  It is one of the most logical religions out there.

But the danger with what you post is not a risk assessment but a denial of truth assessment.  If I told you I'd rather believe that the body is not made up of atoms but of midi-chlorians that could give us the chance to use the Force if we only believe, that is much more desireable than believing there is no such thing as the Force and that atoms are merely atoms.  But which is true?

Now, you may say we know that atoms exist and not midichlorians, so it is a different analysis.  But do we?  Have you ever seen an "atom" except in scientific literature professing them to exist?  Is your belief in atoms merely because it makes sense that they do exist and that what the scientists are telling you is right?  And can you "disprove" the existence of midichlorians?

Religion is kind of like this.  We rely on what scholars say, on the Holy Ghost (or Nirvana or what have you) to confirm truths, and on our own sense of what seems right and wrong.  Faith is an action of questioning and confirming, not of blindly believing.  It is simply done on a spiritual plane that our science is not yet capable of proving or disproving.

The approach I am suggesting is that if I don't know if any religion is true (since they all rely on unprovable beliefs) then my decision could be based on following the religion in which I can avoid the worst amount of punishment if I am wrong - so potentially Islam.

Of course, this is all just theoretical game theory in a sense, since people follow religions because they believe them to be true, and not based on logical game theory reasons...haha
This message was last edited by the player at 03:47, Sat 14 Sept 2013.

Yeah, that's what I was getting at.  The risk/benefit analysis is destroyed by the issue of faith and the fact that following one of them doesn't make it any less true or false.  Therefore, it provides no benefit.  Even if you chose correctly, the lack of "faith" in that religion will most likely make the former adherence to its principles fairly worthless.