Here's a bit of a thinkpiece for you guys.

Like I said - I'm not going to spend much time on this because I view it as a debate that is likely to go nowhere. But there are a few points that I would like to bring up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zip Goshboots

I really believe people are "religious" because they don;t know any better. They are mostly afraid of what the afterlife may or may not be. They hedge their bets, at least publicly.

---

Or maybe, there are people out there who truly believe because they actually think that there's a higher being than themselves. There are people who believe that the conscience is more than just a voice in your head, that the mind is something so incredible that there's a good possiblity that it wasn't created by luck. That good people (and in my opinion not just Christians) will be rewarded and bad people will eventually be punished. The idea of the afterlife is something that comforts me, but not due to convincing myself that there's a god just because I'm scared to die.

And back to the bad apples statement:
Yes I believe that there are bad apples killing it for the rest of the world. There are over 400 people in my church, all of them good people (at least that I know of). But I'm sure you haven't heard of any of them. However, if one of the church members goes out and kills a Muslim "for Jesus", your response would be something to the effect of "wow another death at the name of God." What about the rest of the 399 people? One "Godless" serial killer will not make me think "well if he just introduced Jesus into his life he would have been saved." You know as well as I do that the media will always talk about the stories with the most interest, and then pick it apart until they find out answers as to why he/she did what they did, usually making up shit as they go along.

Yes there are good people that don't have religion, and good people that do. There are bad people who don't believe in a religion, and bad people that do. Unfortunately for most of us (religioius people), the bad people that have religion like to translate things that were originally intended for peace into reasons for killing/bigotry/racism/sexism, whereas most of us look at those people and roll our eyes.

I do have one final question Zip (and I ask this in all honesty, no sarcasm whatsoever): Do you find our society more moral or less moral than it was 100 years ago when religion was much more prevalent in our civilization?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zip Goshboots

How can religion "address" the people who lived before the Greeks, etc,?
What right do people have to address the eternal salvation or damnation of other people?
It IS dogma, and that's all it ever has been, and all it ever will be. That is all it ever can be because that is all people who look to the sky for salvation will ever be able to understand, or be controlled by.

---

Do you seriously want me to answer the question of how religions can address the issue of those who came before the current incarnation of their teachings? I would think a soon to be public teacher would understand how items like "the people who came before" are addressed by those who are making rules in the present day.

And once again thank you for your repeated and unneccessary outburst about how much you don't like religion and how much contempt you have for those of us who practice it.

The problem with Christianity today is not in the basic beliefs of the religion, but within the problematic few who overstep the bounds and totally contradict what (I believe) Christianity truly is.

That, I believe, sums up what I think about it without writing too much. I know, I know, there are so many more complexities. But in summation...

Motwon: Good question. 100 years ago, hmmm...Jim Crow, just 30 years removed from christian endorsed slavery, headed for World War I, plenty of bloodshed in Europe, racial and ehtnic violence pretty prevalent here, horrible pollution world wide.
Actually, I bet religion was NOT as prevalent or pervasive or invasive as it is today.

One thing on religion: You say there are 400 "good" people at your church. That is not, again, a defensible or admissible statement into a discussion about religion. Religionists are among the biggest hypocrites the world has seen, so much so that Jesus spent alot of time warning us about them. I'm not talking about "good" people or "bad" people. My argument is that religion is a hoax that has invaded our lives and our societies and deserves NO place in intelligent discussion about where the world should be headed or governed.
If individuals (who I do NOT think need to be threatened with eternal damnation, or promised eternal reward to be good) wish to practice religion, hell, even if they want to do a little recruiting (like the Gay Army does), more power to ya! I think you're crazy, but just don;t try to buddy up to the guys with their fingers on the buttons that release the nuclear bombs.

Here's one question for the religionists: Who's right? Who's wrong? Fool, has religion addressed that? What the fuck made Jesus so high and mighty, because he said he was? Would you believe him TODAY?!

Has religion addressed who's right and wrong? Seriously?

Yeah, by that I mean whose (who's?) religion is right or wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MoTown

I do have one final question Zip (and I ask this in all honesty, no sarcasm whatsoever): Do you find our society more moral or less moral than it was 100 years ago when religion was much more prevalent in our civilization?

---

I don't want to speak on Zip's behalf, but almost everyone in America was Christian back then, almost everyone is Christian now. I don't know how much has really changed in the long run. But I figure it's a mixed bag - today there are more civil rights for blacks and other ethnic minorities; there is now some form of a social safety net for the poor; children have the right to attend school and no longer have to work; countries are far less eager to go to war with one another; we are a little more aware of the environmental impacts of industry and development.

However, some moral conditions have worsened. Greed and indolence have transformed our society in terrible ways. There is less trust among people. Technologists have dreamed up far more violent weapons. And people seem to be disengaging socially from one another.

Like I said, not much has changed in terms of religion in culture, and the results are a predictably mixed bag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zip Goshboots

Yeah, by that I mean whose (who's?) religion is right or wrong.

---

Yes Boots, religion has addressed whose (the other is the contraction of who is) religion is right and wrong.

Fool:
And what is the answer?

Big Swami: I'm not so sure on the "greed" angle. Big Industry was extremely, well, greedy and monopolistic back then, and later developments included unions, collective bargaining agreements, better working conditions, and liberal programs at least partly based on the re-distribution of wealth.
It is a mixed bag, but again, for those who say we're better off with religion, there's no way to back that up.
And, as we've discussed, our boy Hitchens says that which can be believed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

"The" answer? Zip, religion is a conglomeration of individuals and then organizations all of whom have different opinions on the matter.

Go to any church and ask what they think of Swam's "the religious culture hasn't changed much" statement. Its a matter of perspective. Also, I'd argue against the sloppy use of "almost everyone is Christian". http://www.harrisinteractive.com/har...ex.asp?PID=408

How has the "religous culture" changed? Isn;t the guidebook the same as it has been for two thousand years? Isn't the same shit being taught that was taught two thousand years ago?
I mean, aside form the Catholics deciding that God no longer has purgatory, what's so different?

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/...BL._AA240_.jpg
These don't happen anymore. I don't see many Shakers or Quakers around. If you look at the link I posted earlier it says while 79% of Americans believe there is a God (only 66% are certain of it), only 36% go to church as regularly as once a month. That's certainly a change from the days of using the church as the school house and the town hall (or the town hall as the school house and church).

And no the "guidebook" isn't the same as it was 2000 years ago (by the way it didn't exist 2000 years ago). The Geneva Bible (the version the Pilgrims and early European Americans used) isn't even mentioned today and the King James Bible which became popular later centuries has fallen out of favor (even the revised version) in the 20th-21st century. The current standard is the NIV or New International Version I believe. Not to mention that before the protestant revolution the Bible was seen (and still is by much of Catholicism) as a distant second to the dictates of the church leadership (those guys with the funny hats). Catholicism stands on the argument that the church existed before the bible and so its authority is superior to it (I might be coloring that argument poorly or even be out of date on the issue since I am not a Catholic). So your "isn't the guidebook the same" question wouldn't have even been asked in say the 16th century. You would have asked, "Isn't the church the same as it was 2000 years ago?"

I realize you don't practice it and condemn it at every chance you get, but your bluster would hold more weight if you would actually learn something about religion. You could condemn it on a whole new (and much more effective) level. Its hard to believe anyone who thinks about it would believe that millions of people (or any teaching/strain of thought) had remained the same for over 2 millenium.

This thread isn't complete until we get a one-off post from geerussell.

He usually sums things up pretty nicely, too.

Does this mean we're one step closer to finally getting the official religion thread?

This is the official religion forum, does that help?

If you want to start the thread, blaze that trail.

Well, I just think this thread was steering away from the original topic...people who paint their face blue and worship Cthulhu.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timbeau0805

Well, I just think this thread was steering away from the original topic...people who paint their face blue and worship Cthulhu.

---

IA! IA! CTHULHU FHTAGN!

Let me get this straight, Fool:
The guidebook is different due to new transliterations? Have these transliterations altered the infallible word of God (who supposedly dictated much of this) in such a way as the teachings are different, or the "rules"(for lack of a better term) are different?
And how could the dictates of a church be held above the Bible? How could the teachings of man hold sway over the supposed dictations of the one and only God?
Now, I'm willing to accept that to a large degree, man has to teach man about God or how to practice worship, and how to interpret the Word. But some of us see that that is where dogma overtakes religion, and men (and church) assume a power over people not necessarily given to them by the divine. And the assumption of this power leads to religion, which is a relationship to man or church, and not God.
I think the fact that only 36% of the people who believe in God attend services speaks volumes. It tells me that even people who profess a belief in a God don't trust the intercession of man, and mistrust organized religion.
Or, it says that people just say they believe because they think it sounds right, and don't practice what they say they believe because they really think it's a crock of shit. They really think it's a tale more fantastical than Star Wars or The Lord of the Rings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zip Goshboots

Let me get this straight, Fool:
The guidebook is different due to new transliterations? Have these transliterations altered the infallible word of God (who supposedly dictated much of this) in such a way as the teachings are different, or the "rules"(for lack of a better term) are different?
And how could the dictates of a church be held above the Bible? How could the teachings of man hold sway over the supposed dictations of the one and only God?

---

See PM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zip Goshboots

Now, I'm willing to accept that to a large degree, man has to teach man about God or how to practice worship, and how to interpret the Word. But some of us see that that is where dogma overtakes religion, and men (and church) assume a power over people not necessarily given to them by the divine. And the assumption of this power leads to religion, which is a relationship to man or church, and not God.

---

So you are saying you define religion as a relationship between power and man? While I wouldn't say that's the most precise definition (it allows too many things like government, technology, and education to be defined as religion) I would certainly agree that when any amount of people get together on any common interest power is a neccessary implied result. People together = power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zip Goshboots

I think the fact that only 36% of the people who believe in God attend services speaks volumes. It tells me that even people who profess a belief in a God don't trust the intercession of man, and mistrust organized religion.
Or, it says that people just say they believe because they think it sounds right, and don't practice what they say they believe because they really think it's a crock of shit. They really think it's a tale more fantastical than Star Wars or The Lord of the Rings.

---

There is a recognized factor in survey research that distorts the collecting of true opinions called "social disirability responses" where people's answers (or non-answers in cases of questions about drug use etc.) are distorted by the natural tendency for people to give the more socially exceptable version of things close to their true opinion (or in some cases flat out say the opposite of what they really think. This is exactly why I mentioned the 66% who said they felt certain about god as opposed to the 79% who said they believed a god exists. No survey researcher in the world however, would agree that the 79% to 36% casm between god believers and church goers is due solely (or even primarily) to this however (its not that powerful a force on anonymous response surveys).

The casm is surely due to many things and I completely admit that some portion is due to people attributing the Bible stories to LOTR-like fantasy, and agree about a definite strain that mistrusts organized religion or even just dislikes it, and there are a number of other factors as well (I myself am not a member of any one particular church for reasons not too far off from some of the one's specifically mentioned). What it definately says however is that the "religion" is not the so uniformly the same throughout time and the religious power-hungry world dominators you like to portray religious believers as are not as overwhelming a force on all things as you tend to claim.

We should also be specific when we refer to religion here. We're talking about Christianity for the most part, aren't we?

I'm not getting the Jewish "tribe-vibe" from anyone here, and I don't think any one of us is sufficiently knowledgeable about the role Islam plays in Islamic countries. I consider myself a Buddhist, and I'm familiar with Hinduism, but those are vastly different religions and they don't have remotely the same ideologies as Christianity does. So let's be direct and honest here and say that we're discussing Christianity.

When discussing religion, I DO mean the Big Three. I think each one is equally guilty of crimes against humanity, the destruction of progressive thought, the hindering of scientific research and medicine, and the equivocation of the concept of God.*
*I do believe that aside from the outright pirating of the concept of God by Judaism (the Jew being the "chosen people", a concept I find most irritating, self glorifying, and downright affrontry to any concept of a loving God), that I can't find evidence, or cause to cast Judaism as a religion bent on using violence or some of the other things I rant about as much as the other two.
And I would not be able to accuse Judaism, as I do the other two, of either hopefully waiting for, if not downright trying to cause, the book of Revelation to become a reality.

Fool:
On your second point, as to how I define "religion": I actually DO think it encompasses government, technology, and education. Education is being increasingly invaded by christianity (the pledge of allegiance has made a comback), and there are (I can personally attest to this) many teachers willing to infuse their christianity into the classroom. As for government, there can be no doubt that from "God bless America" right down to that Hindu we had on our very own forum here being castigated by christians in congress, to George Bush's Holy War, that ours, and many, governments are rife with religious thought. Linking your government to the divine has been a trick used by ruling bodies to justify their power since the beginning of time.

Yes, I know you think religion is too involved in other areas but you would agree they are not the same thing and so a definition of religion that would allow a secular government to be defined as a religion is a poor definition, would you not?

And I would hope Jews aren't trying to bring about the Book of Revelations since its located in the New Testament.

As for who we are talking about I would concur that its the 3 book religions but not that its strictly "Christians" (especially since its typically the case that anyone that says they believe in God and isn't a practicing Jew or Muslim is termed a Christian, whether practicing or not).

Actually, upon re reading that post, I define religion as a relationship between and individual and church (using church to mean catholic, evangelical, or even religious movement). The power that is given over to the church or movement by and individual leds to religion, which, in my opinion, again, is a relationship between man and church, not a relationship with God.
So no, any government is not a religion, even a religious government, such as the Taliban.

In my opinion, and I think maybe many agree, the New Testament can be interpreted or taken as anti semitic. The Jews sent Jesus to his death. Christianity takes over, and reduces the stature of the Jew.
And you are correct, the Jewish involvement with Bible writing ends with the book of Malachi. So, obviously they would not be directly involved in the book of Revelation. BUT, does that put Christianity at odds with Judaism?Jews stand in opposition to Islam in a fight over some ground deemed holy, and claimed by both Muslims and Jews as their own. The battles (wars) being fought over there, coupled with our involvement as the protector of Israel (which many right wing religious folks deem as our duty), involves all three in a constant powder keg that just might make Revelation, nothing more than an absurd dream at face value, actually happen. Judaism may not be viewed as trying to bring about Armageddon, but they are nevertheless involved.
All of this seems incredibly primitive to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zip Goshboots

The power that is given over to the church or movement by and individual leds to religion, which, in my opinion, again, is a relationship between man and church, not a relationship with God.

---

I think you would find that many protestants would be fine with that definition.

Hoo boy, I really didn't mean for this to be that long. Sorry in advance.

Humans have a very strong natural spiritual impulse. By "spiritual" I don't really mean "having to do with souls or spirits" but I do mean "caring about things like good and evil, suffering, justice, and transcendence." Religion is a way to tailor that impulse and take advantage of that impulse. Sometimes it is done in a way that helps people in their spiritual quest and sometimes it is not, and it's no different from any other human endeavor in that regard.

In my opinion, whether or not Jesus was a spiritual master is beyond question. The things he said, the things he taught, those are the words of an incredibly wise and thoughtful person (especially considering that as a Jew, his religious background was the Old Testament - sheesh, what a bloodbath). He's renowned by people of other religions. Muslims call him Issa and regard him as an especially important and compassionate prophet. Mahayana Buddhists regard him as a bodhisattva, a profoundly devoted person who will become a Buddha in a future life. Hindus are very fond of him, and many of them like to pray at Christian churches - some of them even regard Jesus as an incarnation of Krishna.

The "religious" structure around Jesus is Christianity, which is made up of churches and doctrines and Bibles and clergy. Every person must go into this structure open-eyed, knowing that corruption, exploitation, and abuse happen inside those structures just like in any other part of life, and that there's no guarantee that the one they've chosen is going to have even a single wise person in it.

The problem with Christianity is that people are brought into those structures as tiny children, long before they are capable of developing that healthy critical judgment, and many people never fully develop it as a result. But the theology of modern Christianity only contributes to the problem: Jesus is God. You are a sinner, and Jesus is the Savior, who spares you from hell only because of His Grace. You may pray to Him, and furthermore you may hope that you correctly interpret His answer, if He is so inclined to give one. But you are only weak flesh, and the best you can hope for is to experience disappointment and suffering all your life, and find transformative bliss in the afterlife. Rarely does anyone ever stop to think: how is this actually helping?

The Buddhists and Hindus scratch their heads when they see Christianity - Christ was wise and compassionate and transcendent. Why don't they teach you to become a Christ?

Ghandi was asked by a BBC reporter about Christian missionaries in India, and he said something like, "It's not that I dislike the Christ. I like your Christ. But I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." But the Christian churches can never teach you to be a Christ. Christ is God. God is the creator and maintainer of the universe. He is infinitely superior to you (even his humility is infinitely superior to yours!), and the wonderful words and deeds attributed to him mean nothing next to that.

The scribes and priests and apostles had a choice. They could have either focused on the teachings of Jesus and crafted a religion of peace, honesty, and compassion, or they could have focused on his uniquely supernatural nature and created a religion of abject self-hatred. But as soon as the reports came in about visions and convulsions and tongues of flame, their decision was made. Really, what choice did they have?

Christianity does teach people to try and be as "Christ-like" as possible.

That's a terribly limited translation of the "theology of modern Christianity".

Religion does not neccessarily teach people not to think critically but is easily abused to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fool

Christianity does teach people to try and be as "Christ-like" as possible.

---

Just because something is said and written frequently does not make it the truth. As far as I can tell, Christians are paying churches brazillions of dollars every year to tell them what they want to hear.

Quote:

---

That's a terribly limited translation of the "theology of modern Christianity".

---

Explain. Which Christian denomination disagrees with anything I've said there in italics?

Quote:

---

Religion does not neccessarily teach people not to think critically but is easily abused to do so.

---

Not sure what you mean to say here.

You said:

Quote:

---

The problem with Christianity is that people are brought into those structures as tiny children, long before they are capable of developing that healthy critical judgment, and many people never fully develop it as a result.

---

As though its the religion that makes them incapable of critical judgment rather than the abuse of the religion.

Quote:

---

Just because something is said and written frequently does not make it the truth. As far as I can tell, Christians are paying churches brazillions of dollars every year to tell them what they want to hear.

---

Perhaps you should do a little more personal research then. I think Zip's tendency to label entire populations is rubbing off on you. There are plenty of Christians trying their best to be (and help others to be) as Christ-like as possible. And its kind of sad and definately unfair to them to dismiss them simply because you don't hang out with them or limit your focus to others.

Quote:

---

Explain. Which Christian denomination disagrees with anything I've said there in italics?

---

I said "limited" as in not the whole story (or theology in this case).

Painting me as painting large populations with a broad brush is unfair. I have had my experiences with catholicism (raised in that, um, church), and many many Sundays spent in many many churches, and have dealt with many many christians. I haven't locked myself in a closet and decided that christians are goofing up the Message.
I have encountered many many christians, as I've said; I find very very few (if any) to be truly spiritual. What I DO find is people with an attachment to their church and their pastor, and actually believing that a talking snake made two people eat an apple, and the rest of the story. Or, at least saying they do (believe that? Fucking stupid!)
Listen, the message that comes down is as Big Swami says: Here's our story, we're sticking to it, give us alot of money (funny how every faction of christianity has its own way of interpreting God's word, but they ALL agree on tithing) and oh, by the way, you'll always fail, there is nothing you can do unless God's grace saves you. Fucking bullshit.
No one is saying that christians aren't, or don't try to be very nice people.
But they ascribe to a primitive culture that needs the affirmation of others telling them that "Jesus loves you", and they ascribe (is ascribe even a word?)
to an outdated, slyly crafted code of rules and regs that quite frankly, if it were writen today would be laughed at.
Now, I haven't had a "bad" or "traumatic" experience with christianity, just the feeling when I'm around them that they just aren't all there, and aren;t really all that sincere. In large part, I get the feeling that this new addiction replaced old ones, or saved them from themselves in alot of cases.
And I do believe that christians and muslims believe they have a coming war, a current war, and as usual, all of humanity will suffer when they really finally decide to go at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fool

You said:
As though its the religion that makes them incapable of critical judgment rather than the abuse of the religion.

---

Or, they could just not go to church at all, neither a good nor an abusive one, and nothing bad would have happened. See where I'm headed with this?

[/quote]Perhaps you should do a little more personal research then. I think Zip's tendency to label entire populations is rubbing off on you. There are plenty of Christians trying their best to be (and help others to be) as Christ-like as possible. And its kind of sad and definately unfair to them to dismiss them simply because you don't hang out with them or limit your focus to others.[/quote]

I actually need to stop and give you some credit here. I have not met every single Christian in the world. There are almost certainly some awesome people out there. But I remain in agreement with Stephen Weinberg, who said, "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil. But for good people to do evil -- that takes religion."

Quote:

---

I said "limited" as in not the whole story (or theology in this case).

---

Help me out here.

I have a huge problem with the concept of Jesus being God incarnate. With that statement, you have more than intimated that people can NOT be christ-like, or christ, period.
Why did "God" have to come down here? What would he need to prove? Why would he need "miracles" to "prove" he was there?
Jesus weren;t God. He were a main. A great main, who tried to tell us we were just like him. All it takes is faith.
We have no faith. We have religion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Swami

Or, they could just not go to church at all, neither a good nor an abusive one, and nothing bad would have happened. See where I'm headed with this?

Perhaps you should do a little more personal research then. I think Zip's tendency to label entire populations is rubbing off on you. There are plenty of Christians trying their best to be (and help others to be) as Christ-like as possible. And its kind of sad and definately unfair to them to dismiss them simply because you don't hang out with them or limit your focus to others.

I actually need to stop and give you some credit here. I have not met every single Christian in the world. There are almost certainly some awesome people out there. But I remain in agreement with Stephen Weinberg, who said, "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil. But for good people to do evil -- that takes religion."



Help me out here.

---

Keep your credit. And are you kidding me with the implication that all evil people are religious? That's really a reply to both of the first two sections.

Limited as in not the whole story. If you want to cut off Christian theology there and act like its the whole package then you are either consciously portraying the creeds of Christianity in a biased light or you are just seeing what you want to see.

Zip, those questions are basic sunday school lessons. No, no man/woman can be as perfect as Christians are supposed to believe Jesus was. In that way he is always a goal to strive for and a strength to fall back on. As for all the "why did God do what he did". Pick up almost any book in the religious inspirational section and the answers to those questions will be in chapter 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fool

Keep your credit. And are you kidding me with the implication that all evil people are religious? That's really a reply to both of the first two sections.

Limited as in not the whole story. If you want to cut off Christian theology there and act like its the whole package then you are either consciously portraying the creeds of Christianity in a biased light or you are just seeing what you want to see.

Zip, those questions are basic sunday school lessons. No, no man/woman can be as perfect as Christians are supposed to believe Jesus was. In that way he is always a goal to strive for and a strength to fall back on. As for all the "why did God do what he did". Pick up almost any book in the religious inspirational section and the answers to those questions will be in chapter 1.

---

Of COURSE I see it in a biased light, Fool! I think it's total bullshit! The only refernce guides christians have is their made up book of stories and parables, the bible. You want to talk about basics and rudimentaries? Talk about circular reasoning or something like that. That's what christians use to "prove" their points or teachings.
I completely disagree with your point on Jesus: Show me a scripture where he said man couldn't be like him; I think his teachings were that we could. BUT, like I said, that wasn;t good enough for religion, that would take away their control of the masses. Jesus had to be made into god so people would always fail and need to go to church.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fool

Keep your credit. And are you kidding me with the implication that all evil people are religious? That's really a reply to both of the first two sections.

---

I was not implying anything of the sort, and I really do apologize if it came off that way; I don't think all evil people are religious. I'm religious in my own way. I offer a sincere apology for missing my mark there - I'm not a polemicist, I'm just a sloppy writer who doesn't always say what he means.

What I'm trying to say is that religion isn't necessarily, but can be, a force that causes a person to act against the dictates of his conscience. It isn't a certainty, but it does happen. And it doesn't happen if you choose not to participate in any religion. I hope that's a little clearer.

Quote:

---

Limited as in not the whole story. If you want to cut off Christian theology there and act like its the whole package then you are either consciously portraying the creeds of Christianity in a biased light or you are just seeing what you want to see.

---

There's no doubt that I'm no theologian. I don't try to pretend like I know everything there is to know about Christian theology. In fact, I haven't been in a church in over a year, and even then it was a Unitarian church, so it wasn't a Christian church, strictly speaking. I know I'm missing some information here, and I'm curious to hear more.

Don't think I'm just trying to jump all over you. I've told you that I like Jesus. But I see the nuns on TV, and the politicians trying to tell us that "America is a Christian nation," and the church groups who take over local school boards and shut down the sex education programs, and stories about megachurches with Christian rock concerts and ATMs in the lobby, and that might as well be on a different planet from the Jesus I read about in the Bible.

The Jesus you read about in the Bible believes there is another plane, another place, another reality beyond that which we can sense here on Earth.

Do you?

I'll take the polemicist baton, Swami, because chrisitanity is hammering away from the other side.
Fool, one thing here: Your keep going back to the "Oh, if you only knew" tack. My questions regarding God that you suggest a look into a "See Dick and Jane Go To Church" book were asked in an ironic sense, as in, "God" don;t need to prove nothin' to no one.
The Greeks had gods who came down here to do a little mingling. The christians and Jews simpy re wrote it to fit their monotheism and to give credence to their authority and mythology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg's_stages_of_moral_development

an interesting article on point to some of the topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by giffman

The Jesus you read about in the Bible believes there is another plane, another place, another reality beyond that which we can sense here on Earth.

Do you?

---

I'm willing to accept that the universe is a very complicated place, but if you're asking me whether or not there is a Heaven where God, the angels, and the saintly dead live forever, I don't know if I can buy something that specific.

I don't want to sound glib, but, since I'm not a Christian, I don't have to believe everything in the Bible. I can pick and choose the stuff that really stands out to me. I can't hide the fact that Matthew 6:28-29 just really makes a huge impression on me every time I read it. But at the same time, I can't hide the fact that Luke 14:26 is really disturbing. I'm willing to deal with the bad if the good stuff is very good.

And Deuteronomy 13:6-10...don't even get me started.