Is Insha'Allah" (God Willing) OK for Christian

[joer]

Is Insha'Allah" (God Willing) OK for Christians to use, but not Muslims? or visa versa?

Fisherking posted the following on a thread created to give positive support to believers. This is a site that is open to debate Religious views of ALL forms. A primary focus of debate is entailed in its name. Debating Christianity.com. It appears some disapprove of the expression Insa Allah I dont even know if it's spelt right. Im not even sure of its exact translated meaning. But I have heard it used often. And I have heard it used By Middle Eastern Christians AS WELL AS Muslims and loosely translated as according to Gods Will and more colloquially as God Willing.

As I used it initially was not with an intent to differentiate between Middle Eastern Muslims using the term OR Middle Eastern Christians using the term. Or any bodies particular meaning associated with the word. I meant it quite generally and honestly as turning over of OUR doing of Gods in GOOD FAITH as an action offered up to serve the Will of God as is implied by the term God Willing OR as translated into a Middle eastern tongue Insha'Allah". Thus reminding myself and my brothers and sisters that service in doing Gods Will is a global endeavor and NOT just a local isolated expression.

But it seems pretty obvious that some people here and at least one declared Christian fundamentalist. Whose post is included here.

It appears this post is more of a challenge than an Affirmation of Faith. So I offer it up here for debate where it belongs, for Fisherman or any other believer who cares to review the arguments as presented.

May we learn and do God's Will in Good Faith. Insa' Allah. is:
May we learn and do God's Will in Good Faith. God Willing.
Fear not my brothers and sisters to do the Will of God and bless the doing of God's Will

Yes, but most Christian do not worship a Muslim god.

in every Language and Culture on Earth for that is God's and Christ's Will.
In this country the Hispanic population is rising. And your Hispanic bothers and sisters who are faithful in remembering that all comes from God. And All should take joy in doing God's Will. When they share a blessing or an expression of their desired behavior or achievement they say "Si Dios Quiere!" - God Willing. Fear not your Muslim brothers and sisters who bow before and bend their life and actions in life to Serve and Honor God by doing God's Will.

Yes, but Islam is a religion(a false one in my opinion).

Follow Not those who profess to do God's Will in any language or Culture even professed Christians who then go and DO THIER OWN HUMAN WILL to hate and fear others

I do not hate or fear them, I just consider their religion to be false, based on the false teachings of Muhammad.

May we learn and do God's Will in Good Faith. Insa' Allah.

Hi joer,
Why did you post the Muslim phrase "Insa' Allah" in the Christian forum? Would you consider removing the phrase from your post?

In Christian love,
GentleDove

Mere_Christian

joer,

Me too.

By the way, are you a photographer of wildlife?

So my question to you Fisherking and to any other believers who wish to comment, Are you Objecting to the use of the language regardless of weather Christians or Muslims are using it? Or are you objecting to just the use of the term Insa Allah (God Willing) ONLY when A Christian uses it regardless of where that Christian comes from?

Here's a little reference on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insha'Allah

[Fisherking]

So my question to you Fisherking and to any other believers who wish to comment, Are you Objecting to the use of the language regardless of weather Christians or Muslims are using it?

I'll try to be more clear.
If the Christians on this site were arabic Christians, speaking arabic and the phrase was used, I doubt it would be misunderstood.

If the Christians on this site are predominantly english speaking Christians, and
english is used in the sentence up until God is referenced, there is a chance it would be taken wrong by the english speaking Christian audience (as it has?).

If the Christian making the statement seemed to have the belief that "all paths lead to God" implying that every religion under the sun leads to the truth about God, some would take issue (my reservation until it's clarified).

Or are you objecting to just the use of the term Insa Allah (God Willing) ONLY when A Christian uses it regardless of where that Christian comes from?

I objected to the term because it is still not clear to me how or why you used the term and what your intentions were using it in the first place. I have asked several questions that would help clear it up for me, but they have either been overlooked or ignored.
Why not just come out and say what ya mean, and mean what ya say?

[joer]

So my question to you Fisherking and to any other believers who wish to comment, Are you Objecting to the use of the language regardless of weather Christians or Muslims are using it?

I'll try to be more clear.
If the Christians on this site were arabic Christians, speaking arabic and the phrase was used, I doubt it would be misunderstood.

If the Christians on this site are predominantly english speaking Christians, and
english is used in the sentence up until God is referenced, there is a chance it would be taken wrong by the english speaking Christian audience (as it has?).

If the Christian making the statement seemed to have the belief that "all paths lead to God" implying that every religion under the sun leads to the truth about God, some would take issue (my reservation until it's clarified).

Or are you objecting to just the use of the term Insa Allah (God Willing) ONLY when A Christian uses it regardless of where that Christian comes from?

I objected to the term because it is still not clear to me how or why you used the term and what your intentions were using it in the first place. I have asked several questions that would help clear it up for me, but they have either been overlooked or ignored.
Why not just come out and say what ya mean, and mean what ya say?

OK My friend I think I see pretty much where you are coming from. Let me start with your last question first. You wrote:

I objected to the term because it is still not clear to me how or why you used the term and what your intentions were using it in the first place..Why not just come out and say what ya mean, and mean what ya say?

OK in the OP I thought I had stated my intent pretty clearly. But apparently not. Heres what I said Im adding [Will] in brackets where I had intended to write it but missed it.

I meant it quite generally and honestly as turning over of OUR doing of Gods [Will] in GOOD FAITH as an action offered up to serve the Will of God as is implied by the term God Willing OR as translated into a Middle eastern tongue Insha'Allah". Thus reminding myself and my brothers and sisters that service in doing Gods Will is a global endeavor and NOT just a local isolated expression.

So, although it was spontaneous response, the underlying intention was intending to bridge a global gap and misunderstanding and conflict that has been going on between Muslims and Christians for a long long time. By using the Arabic version of God Willing I was hoping to show that we are a global community and our divisions need to be resolved. And part of the resolution is desensitization to the negative connotations between cultural beliefs surrounding God. IMHO.

We can live together without killing each other over our diverse views. So as I understand you FK, because Im an English speaking Christian on an English speaking site, like Mere_Christian, you found the use of InshaAllah inflammatory at least among certain English specking Christians that have objections to the concept of God held by Muslims. Is that correct?

I appreciate you clarifying that. Fisherking. Please let me know if I understand you correctly and if Ive answered your question clearly enough about my intentions in using that phrase. If Ive satisfied your question about my intent please ask me any questions you like.

I thank you for your candor.

[justifyothers]

Is Insha'Allah" (God Willing) OK for Christians to use, but not Muslims? or visa versa?

Fisherking posted the following on a thread created to give positive support to believers. This is a site that is open to debate Religious views of ALL forms. A primary focus of debate is entailed in its name. Debating Christianity.com. It appears some disapprove of the expression Insa Allah I dont even know if it's spelt right. Im not even sure of its exact translated meaning. But I have heard it used often. And I have heard it used By Middle Eastern Christians AS WELL AS Muslims and loosely translated as according to Gods Will and more colloquially as God Willing.

As I used it initially was not with an intent to differentiate between Middle Eastern Muslims using the term OR Middle Eastern Christians using the term. Or any bodies particular meaning associated with the word. I meant it quite generally and honestly as turning over of OUR doing of Gods in GOOD FAITH as an action offered up to serve the Will of God as is implied by the term God Willing OR as translated into a Middle eastern tongue Insha'Allah". Thus reminding myself and my brothers and sisters that service in doing Gods Will is a global endeavor and NOT just a local isolated expression.

But it seems pretty obvious that some people here and at least one declared Christian fundamentalist. Whose post is included here.

It appears this post is more of a challenge than an Affirmation of Faith. So I offer it up here for debate where it belongs, for Fisherman or any other believer who cares to review the arguments as presented.

May we learn and do God's Will in Good Faith. Insa' Allah. is:
May we learn and do God's Will in Good Faith. God Willing.
Fear not my brothers and sisters to do the Will of God and bless the doing of God's Will

Yes, but most Christian do not worship a Muslim god.

in every Language and Culture on Earth for that is God's and Christ's Will.
In this country the Hispanic population is rising. And your Hispanic bothers and sisters who are faithful in remembering that all comes from God. And All should take joy in doing God's Will. When they share a blessing or an expression of their desired behavior or achievement they say "Si Dios Quiere!" - God Willing. Fear not your Muslim brothers and sisters who bow before and bend their life and actions in life to Serve and Honor God by doing God's Will.

Yes, but Islam is a religion(a false one in my opinion).

Follow Not those who profess to do God's Will in any language or Culture even professed Christians who then go and DO THIER OWN HUMAN WILL to hate and fear others

I do not hate or fear them, I just consider their religion to be false, based on the false teachings of Muhammad.

May we learn and do God's Will in Good Faith. Insa' Allah.

Hi joer,
Why did you post the Muslim phrase "Insa' Allah" in the Christian forum? Would you consider removing the phrase from your post?

In Christian love,
GentleDove

Mere_Christian

joer,

Me too.

By the way, are you a photographer of wildlife?

So my question to you Fisherking and to any other believers who wish to comment, Are you Objecting to the use of the language regardless of weather Christians or Muslims are using it? Or are you objecting to just the use of the term Insa Allah (God Willing) ONLY when A Christian uses it regardless of where that Christian comes from?

Here's a little reference on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insha'Allah

Hi Joer!
I saw this over in Holy Huddle, but decided not to comment because I thought it could get silly.........well, here we are. There is nothing wrong with your comment. It is a nice phrase. I wonder if it had been in French, if we would see this type of reaction?
What if I type Shalom at the end of my post? Would this come under fire too? I bet not.
My problem with this type of thinking is that it shows little or no understanding of the faiths of others. There is no tolerance involved, and I don't think Jesus would have had any problem with your comment whatsoever

How can true unity ever be a possibility with this type of thinking? The Us VS Them mentality must die. We are all God's children.

[Goat]

Hi Joer!
I saw this over in Holy Huddle, but decided not to comment because I thought it could get silly.........well, here we are. There is nothing wrong with your comment. It is a nice phrase. I wonder if it had been in French, if we would see this type of reaction?
What if I type Shalom at the end of my post? Would this come under fire too? I bet not.
My problem with this type of thinking is that it shows little or no understanding of the faiths of others. There is no tolerance involved, and I don't think Jesus would have had any problem with your comment whatsoever

How can true unity ever be a possibility with this type of thinking? The Us VS Them mentality must die. We are all God's children.

The only time I object to 'Shalom' if it get thrown in with a lot of fake Hebrew in an effort to try to convert Jews. That happens sometimes.

[Zzyzx]

.

How can true unity ever be a possibility with this type of thinking? The Us VS Them mentality must die. We are all God's children.

Unity CANNOT, in my opinion, co-exist with competitive religions -- whose beliefs are DIVISIVE not cohesive. "My god is better than your god" is characteristic of religion in general (with a few possible exceptions).

Christians condemning other "gods" as false and other faiths as misguided are part of the problem (perhaps a major part) and NOT part of the solution. Islam is no better. Warring factions of each are willing to kill each other and others "in the name of god" -- for the "sin" of worshiping the wrong god or worshiping in the wrong way (or wearing long hair or too little clothing).

[JoeyKnothead]

I agree in part to Zzyzx's statement, and think it is generally correct; but there are (if only a few) cases of differing religions, and sects coming together. I think of recent Muslim/Jewish/Christian meetings in the Atlanta, Ga area in this regard. From the lack of negative press, I assume such went well.

I read the OP as an agreement that Islam and Christianity worship the same god (and believe this is the case, based on much hearsay from folks I trust). In that regard I think it would do well for folks to realize that if they worship the same god, then no matter the language, wishing one well, or wishing "God's will be done" I hope would be considered a bringing together rather than a divisive issue.

We could extend that to different gods as well. When the statement is made, the one who receives it should consider it in terms of their god, and not the speaker's.

As an atheist I hear folks say to me, "God bless you". In the vast majority of cases this is meant as an honorable way to say "I wish you well". Only when in context of some insult would I ever think one wishing their god's blessing on me to be an insult, or a reason for divisiveness.

With these in mind, if He's up there, "God bless you all". Though I have absolutely no reason to think one can or would.

[joer]

.

How can true unity ever be a possibility with this type of thinking? The Us VS Them mentality must die. We are all God's children.

Unity CANNOT, in my opinion, co-exist with competitive religions -- whose beliefs are DIVISIVE not cohesive. "My god is better than your god" is characteristic of religion in general (with a few possible exceptions).

Christians condemning other "gods" as false and other faiths as misguided are part of the problem (perhaps a major part) and NOT part of the solution. Islam is no better. Warring factions of each are willing to kill each other and others "in the name of god" -- for the "sin" of worshiping the wrong god or worshiping in the wrong way (or wearing long hair or too little clothing).

Here's an excerpt from the Urantia Book Zzy, that I think addresses the issue of Religious unity that you and Justify raise and that others have raised here. It reflects more of the positive view that there is a way to get past our religious differences, and that is being joined in religious spirit even if we are not joined in religious viewpoint. I see many examples of this taking place in the world now as interfaith practices are increasing and the deadly religious conflicts of the past are being left behind in a normal slow evolutionary pace.

But when the critical mass of recognition of the utility and potential for progress to establishing the brotherhood and sisterhood of humankind, of this concept of being joined in spirit is recognized, just like certain changes in evolution it will be quick and sudden. And not a moment to soon. IMHO.

"P.1732 - 2 The religions of authority can only divide men and set them in conscientious array against each other; the religion of the spirit will progressively draw men together and cause them to become understandingly sympathetic with one another. The religions of authority require of men uniformity in belief, but this is impossible of realization in the present state of the world. The religion of the spirit requires only unity of experience--uniformity of destiny--making full allowance for diversity of belief. The religion of the spirit requires only uniformity of insight, not uniformity of viewpoint and outlook. The religion of the spirit does not demand uniformity of intellectual views, only unity of spirit feeling. The religions of authority crystallize into lifeless creeds; the religion of the spirit grows into the increasing joy and liberty of ennobling deeds of loving service and merciful ministration."

"P.1742 - 2 The issues of battle are clearly drawn as the Master and his associates prepare to begin the proclamation of a new religion, the religion of the spirit of the living God who dwells in the minds of men."

[Zzyzx]

.

Unity CANNOT, in my opinion, co-exist with competitive religions -- whose beliefs are DIVISIVE not cohesive. "My god is better than your god" is characteristic of religion in general (with a few possible exceptions).

Christians condemning other "gods" as false and other faiths as misguided are part of the problem (perhaps a major part) and NOT part of the solution. Islam is no better. Warring factions of each are willing to kill each other and others "in the name of god" -- for the "sin" of worshiping the wrong god or worshiping in the wrong way (or wearing long hair or too little clothing).

Here's an excerpt from the Urantia Book Zzy, that I think addresses the issue of Religious unity that you and Justify raise and that others have raised here.

Joer, you are aware of the regard in which I hold the Urantia Book. The fanciful quotations below do nothing to improve that opinion. I am not impressed by tales of "pie in the sky", "gods in the sky", "communications from extra-terrestrials or supernaturals", or other forms of fanciful thinking.

If you wish to speak to me, as you seem determined to do, you will have to speak in real world terms to actually communicate. Citing the Urantia book, the Bible, the Koran, Gone with the Wind, or Peter Pan is NOT likely to be convincing (although all are regarded as equally authoritative in this sub-forum).

"P.1732 - 2 The religions of authority can only divide men and set them in conscientious array against each other; the religion of the spirit will progressively draw men together and cause them to become understandingly sympathetic with one another. The religions of authority require of men uniformity in belief, but this is impossible of realization in the present state of the world.

I do not purport to know the meaning of "religions of authority" implied by whoever wrote that statement. However, it may be somewhat similar to the term I prefer, "organized, commercial religion" " the top then thousand or so sects, cults, denominations (and whatever else they call themselves or are know by others)

Those groups DO tend to be competitive and divisive " to claim superiority for their "gods" and their worship practices " and (usually) to condemn as false all competitors.

The religion of the spirit requires only unity of experience --uniformity of destiny--making full allowance for diversity of belief.

In my opinion, "religion of the spirit" is an idealistic concept that is a product of wishful thinking " and is unlikely to be realized for many generations, if ever.

The religion of the spirit requires only uniformity of insight, not uniformity of viewpoint and outlook. The religion of the spirit does not demand uniformity of intellectual views, only unity of spirit feeling.

"Unity of spiritual feeling" would be nice IF such a thing were to occur. Does anyone offer a rational plan to bring that about in the real world?

The religions of authority crystallize into lifeless creeds; the religion of the spirit grows into the increasing joy and liberty of ennobling deeds of loving service and merciful ministration."

Nice words, no substance. Be convincing " PROVE it, don't just talk about it wishfully.

"P.1742 - 2 The issues of battle are clearly drawn as the Master and his associates prepare to begin the proclamation of a new religion, the religion of the spirit of the living God who dwells in the minds of men."

Where can one obtain credible, real world information about the "master and his associates" and the "new religion of the spirit"?

[joer]

Z you wrote.

Joer, you are aware of the regard in which I hold the Urantia Book.

I Know. I could tell when you got all pushed out of shape about me not quoting it in that other thread. You were so afraid I was trying to steal TUBs important information and claim it as my own. I had no idea it was that important to you. People use text from the bible and other religious sources all the time without citing the source But Ive never seen you take them to the mat like you did me. I was surprised Zzy. I didnt really think you cared that much about stuff from the Urantia Book to make it that important to you. Well we live and learn. Well I wont make that mistake again. At least not with You and Byofrcs.

If you wish to speak to me, as you seem determined to do, you will have to speak in real world terms to actually communicate. Citing the Urantia book, the Bible, the Koran, Gone with the Wind, or Peter Pan is NOT likely to be convincing (although all are regarded as equally authoritative in this sub-forum).

In my opinion, "religion of the spirit" is an idealistic concept that is a product of wishful thinking " and is unlikely to be realized for many generations, if ever.

I do speak to you in real world terms. I cant help it if you dont recognize the reality of Hope. The power of an ideal. Or the patience of working towards those goals. Apparently those things were important enough in real life to elect a president based on the Hope of his being able to achieve or AT LEAST TRY to achieve things that will better our society. So while you may imply those arent real world terms, thats only so in your World View.

There are others that DO VALUE declaring HOPE. Establishing Ideals. And working towards those ends regardless of HOW LONG it will take, simply because its the RIGHT THING TO DO. In real world terms it was impossible for the crew of Apollo thirteen to make it back to earth alive. And it may have been called "wishful thinking" for Nasas leaders to insist that they would not settle for Real World terms. But to insists we go beyond those terms and bring them back alive. Failure was not an option EVEN WHEN IT SEEMED TO BE THE ONLY REALITY LEFT. They refused to accept it. And they did go beyond their wildest dreams and return them home alive.

The real miracle there to me was refusing to take NO for an answer. And I have NO DOUBT about HOW FORTUNATE those astronauts were to survive. Their chances IMHO were less than a snowballs chance of surviving in hell. And I use miracle and hell figuratively not literally so please dont get to excited about the use of those two terms.

Thank You Zzy.You write:

Where can one obtain credible, real world information about the "master and his associates" and the "new religion of the spirit"?

In the Urantia Book.

[Zzyzx]

.

Joer, you are aware of the regard in which I hold the Urantia Book.

I Know.

You should have known very clearly from our earlier discussions. Had they slipped your mind?

I could tell when you got all pushed out of shape about me not quoting it in that other thread. You were so afraid I was trying to steal TUBs important information and claim it as my own. I had no idea it was that important to you.

What warped thinking. You got caught plagiarizing (presenting the work of others as though it was your own " without proper citation).

The nature of the source from which the work is stolen is of no significance " it is the ACT of copying without credit that is offensive.

You do not seem to have grasped the concept " do not steal " from anyone, anywhere. I am opposed to the theft " regardless of the source.

The act of plagiarizing reflects upon the credibility of the plagiarizer " not upon the source. Stealing ideas from a comic book is no different from stealing ideas from a religious book.

People use text from the bible and other religious sources all the time without citing the source But Ive never seen you take them to the mat like you did me. I was surprised

Have you ever noticed notations such as "Gen 1:3" in biblical quotations? That denotes the source.

Famous and generally recognizable statements and sayings are commonly accepted without citation " particularly if enclosed in quotation marks.

The use of quotation marks is strongly advised " as would be pointed out in a freshman ethics or composition class.

Zzy. I didnt really think you cared that much about stuff from the Urantia Book to make it that important to you.

Again, you seem to overlook the fact that my objection to plagiarism has nothing to do with the source. I am equally opposed to stealing text from the Communist Manifesto or Snow White. It is the ACT of stealing that I oppose.

I am confident that most readers understand.

Are you playing dumb?

Well we live and learn. Well I wont make that mistake again. At least not with You and Byofrcs.

Excellent. I taught my son and daughter forty plus years ago to avoid taking what did not belong to them " and taught several students to avoid stealing the work of others.

Perhaps they went on to continue stealing when away from me or other watchful people. Perhaps, instead, they learned to resist the temptation to take what does not belong to them.

If you wish to speak to me, as you seem determined to do, you will have to speak in real world terms to actually communicate. Citing the Urantia book, the Bible, the Koran, Gone with the Wind, or Peter Pan is NOT likely to be convincing (although all are regarded as equally authoritative in this sub-forum).

In my opinion, "religion of the spirit" is an idealistic concept that is a product of wishful thinking " and is unlikely to be realized for many generations, if ever.

I do speak to you in real world terms.I cant help it if you dont recognize the reality of Hope.

"Reality of hope" has nothing to do with my refusal to accept fanciful tales.

Is it speaking in "real world terms" to present the Urantia book as a credible source of information " with its claims to represent telepathic communication from extraterrestrial beings?

Is that REAL WORLD to you?

The power of an ideal. Or the patience of working towards those goals.

Because I refuse to accept tales from the Urantia book, the Bible, Gone with the Wind, and Peter Pan, do you ASSUME that I do not recognize the power of an ideal or that I do not have the "patience of working toward those goals"?

Are you omniscient or covariant " to claim to know my thinking on such matters?

WHAT GOALS do you propose under the subject of "reality of hope" that I supposedly dismiss or ignore?

Apparently those things were important enough in real life to elect a president based on the Hope of his being able to achieve or AT LEAST TRY to achieve things that will better our society. So while you may imply those arent real world terms, thats only so in your World View.

What a nave "interpretation" of my "world view".

Do you not understand that working toward a goal or betterment of society is NOT dependent upon religious convictions (or belief in space aliens)?

Do refuse to realize that I actually WORK toward "betterment of our society" as a large part of my life? Do refuse to acknowledge that my wife and I work many hours every week as volunteers in our nation's public parks and campgrounds? Do deny that we have for years volunteered to work in food bank programs providing groceries (and clothing, and household items, and even housing) to families in need?

Instead of "hope" we WORK " we "walk the talk".

What about the ACTIONS by my wife and me implies lack of concern for "betterment of society"?

There are others that DO VALUE declaring HOPE. Establishing Ideals. And working towards those ends regardless of HOW LONG it will take,

Others understand, even if you refuse, that to become a college professor required many years (a decade) of working toward a goal (some might say "an ideal"). That requires as much "dedication to a goal" as to become a medical doctor, an airline pilot, a structural engineer, etc " all of which are recognized as significant and demanding goal achievements.

simply because its the RIGHT THING TO DO.

The "right thing to do", for many people, is NOT determined by religious beliefs. Can you not accept that MANY people do "the right thing" by their own value system and judgment WITHOUT reference to "gods"?

Do you not realize that many people do very WRONG things WITH reference to "gods"?

If we emphasize "doing the right thing" RATHER that "doing right for god", ALL people can be included. Focusing upon "gods" is commonly divisive.

In real world terms it was impossible for the crew of Apollo thirteen to make it back to earth alive. And it may have been called "wishful thinking" for Nasas leaders to insist that they would not settle for Real World terms. But to insists we go beyond those terms and bring them back alive. Failure was not an option EVEN WHEN IT SEEMED TO BE THE ONLY REALITY LEFT. They refused to accept it. And they did go beyond their wildest dreams and return them home alive.

Do you understand that the people involved in the event were SCIENTISTS " and many were probably ATHEISTS?

How do you account for THEIR actions? Must they have been secret admirers of the Urantia book or the bible?

OR, were they likely doing what they thought best under the circumstances " doing well what they knew how to do?

The real miracle there to me was refusing to take NO for an answer.

I see no "miracle" in refusing to take no for an answer " in any situation.

And I have NO DOUBT about HOW FORTUNATE those astronauts were to survive.

I agree. HOWEVER, in addition to "good fortune" I recognize a great deal of practical, real world thinking and actions by highly motivated and highly qualified people were involved in the successful completion of the mission.

I do NOT credit any supernatural being or event. Nor do I use the term "miracle" even to imply "an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment". Instead, I use the terms "excellent and successful"

Their chances IMHO were less than a snowballs chance of surviving in hell. And I use miracle and hell figuratively not literally so please dont get to excited about the use of those two terms.

Now, kindly apply your concepts to the space shuttle Columbia disaster and the Challenger disaster.

Do you think that "hope" was NOT present in those cases?

Where can one obtain credible, real world information about the "master and his associates" and the "new religion of the spirit"?

In the Urantia Book.

Notice that I asked for CREDIBLE, REAL WORLD information. As you are aware, I do not accept the Urantia book to be anything more than unverified tales by unidentified writers claiming to have telepathic contact from extra-terrestrial beings.

Since you KNOW I do not accept the book as valid, and it is ALL you offer as evidence of "the master and his associates", you MUST realize that you have NO credible, real world evidence to present.

The Urantia book is certainly suggestive much more of science fiction than real world information. Can you DEMONSTRATE that the information is valid?