That's a fact.

Okay, Philip. Seventy-plus posts on this thread and a lot of them are mine. I'm tired.

Besides, there's just a wee little chance we could start going in circles. :) I think I'm ready to move on.

As you point out, there is a definite contrast between the Benevolence of God and some of his actions as described in the Bible. However, the central truth of the Resurrection makes no sense at all if God is not Good. Hence I believe God is good and accounts which describe him as otherwise are spurious.

My sources are, as always in relgious matters, threefold: Revelation, Tradition and Scripture. Scripture is not the most important in this case, because as you have said the bullk of scripture does not portray a benevolent God.

Huh? Strange that in all my years of studying and teaching Revelation I've never even heard of any "book of deeds." Got something to back that up with?

"Besides Revelation there is also what we are taught about the nature of God, inlcluding that he is Good."

Yes, and as Adam has pointed out in a recent thread, the Bible can be quite ambiguous about how "good" God is. It says he's good and then talks about him doing and plotting things that clearly aren't good. (Remember, you just said there's a standard independent of God.) So, which is it? Why should I accept what the Bible says about God being good and reject what it just as clearly says about him someday having people cast into the "lake of fire" because of decisions they made based upon insufficient evidence? You just decide God is good, ergo, he can't really mean all that? Or, God is good, so the parts that would show him to be an ogre can't be inspired? What not start out with "God is an ogre," and conclude that the parts about him being good aren't inspired? Experience from the real world? I'm sure you wouldn't mean earthquakes and hurricanes and tsunamis and asteroid impacts and erupting volcanoes and disease and whatnot. They don't show that God is good, so where do you get the idea? My guess is, ultimately, the Bible. Even your traditions derive from it.

You are correct that there are difficulties in having knowledge of the world to come. Besides Revelation there is also what we are taught about the nature of God, inlcluding that he is Good. There is still an extent to which I am indulging in idle speculation, or "making it up as I go along"...

Yes you are going a "little" further. In fact, there's nothing in Scripture that hints that the judged will have any choices at the time of the judgment.

Perhaps the most famous passage is in Revelation 20:

Rev 20:11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.
Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds.
Rev 20:14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.
Rev 20:15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

Now, your version of things would be a lot more palatable. If would be a lot more just, because it would allow for an informed choice. People would choose on the basis of actual indisputable evidence at hand.

Then problem is, that's not what Christianity teaches. It teaches we have to believe now based upon the kind of evidence that Christians themselves wouldn't accept in any other context. If we don't make the "right" choice, well, you see for yourself what the "inspired" writer said.

What I'm wondering is, where did you find your inspiration? I don't recall Lewis being of that opinion, although I may not be remembering right. The "chaplain at Durham," maybe? Where does he get his inspiration? I mean, when we're talking about heaven and hell and such, there's nothing in the physical world that will give us any help at all in resolving the matter. There will have to be revelation, some kind of knowledge imported directly from the spirit world. What revelation do you or C.S. Lewis or the good chaplain refer to?

You're not just making things up as you go along, are you? ;)

I concede the Gospels are not eyewitness accounts, with the possible exception of John. Their character as a particular type of source obviously means that we should be cautious about accepting everything they say as true. But it is still good evidence that Jesus existed. (The Resurrection narrative is a seperate issue, though of course if Jesus didn't exist he couldn't have been resurrected).

Thankyou. I'm not sure what your interpretation of atheism is (you are an atheist?). But if it is in broad agreement with Adam, I see very little to criticise.

The gospels were written from an oral tradition about Jesus? That sounds reasonable, but it doesn't sound like good evidence to consider them to be true. Are you conceding that the Gospels are not eyewitness accounts?

I must say, I think your particular interpretation of Christianity doesn't sound too bad at all, but not as believable as you say.

The Last Judgement is a standard Christian doctrine. That it involves a choice on the part of the judged is hinted at in several places, but I am probably going a little further than most interpretations. In this I follow C.S.Lewis.

Rowan, the epistles of St.Paul contain numerous references to the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, of which the most natural explanation (despite attempts to demonstrate otherwise) is that they refer to a person called Jesus who lived on Earth and was crucified. The Gospels are thought by most scholars to have written down an oral tradition about Jesus, of which the narrative of his death was the most detailed part.

I didn't say Hell doesn't exist, just that people are not sent there for their beliefs. Hell is consequent on rejection of Almighty God (ultimate rejection, not mere unbelief in this life). It has to exist as a posssibility, since we have free will. There may not in practise be anybody in it, though.