John A. Broussard

Hmm!

Do the words and deeds of other supposed miracle workers also prevent them from being mere mortals?

Almost every major religion has its miracle workers. Even some of the minor religions come up with such specialties.

For example, there's an Eskimo culture hero who can walk on water and also walk knee deep in solid ground.

Does that prevent him from being a mere mortal.

I look forward to your answer.

911

I have a problem like many people here, taking the words of the bible at face value.

So what I have done unlike many here (who simply throws it all out) is to reflect on what the Bible says with my own experiences in my walk with God.

Much of what Jesus said or were reportedly to have said makes sense to me in a way that is not "mainstream Christianity."

I have more reservations with "mainstream Christianity" then I ever will have with the Bible.

"mainstream Christianity" has too many entrenched interests to allow interpretations of the Bible that is non conforming with their teachings and practices.

In other words, I have problems with organised religion.

Religion is your personal walk with God.

Clarice O'C

Why, then, is religion so public?

911

Organised religion is public. To mistake that for the spirit of religion is tragic

Freiheit

911,

No, it makes sense, I just don't agree that that is an affective way to approach things. But regardless, if something is true because you believe it, why Christianity? Why not pick something better? I don't define truth as being "whatever someone believes" I define it as that which corresponds to an objective reality.

There is a distinction that you are not making here, though. People in the asylum believe something without evidence no matter what--that is why they are insane and cannot function properly. Sane people base their beliefs on evidence--appealing to an objective reality.

I don't think that follows at all. A sane person takes potential claims and continually appeals to evidence in order to verify those claims. It is not necessary to "discard" claims merely because they don't fit with your current world view. You could remember them and consider them for future reference. And if you are betting your life, wouldn't it be wise to make an informed bet rather than picking randomly? To a certain extent you must have agreed to this, otherwise you wouldn't be able to type on a keyboard or have survived long enough to learn to type on a keyboard. I mean, if you want to believe that you are invincible because it makes you feel good to think that, that's nice, but you'll probably get hit by one of those cars you don't bother avoiding.

Arrived where? The asylum? Hell? Rotting under ground after wasting your short life?

Freiheit

I apologize for the confusion. I knew where it came from. I didn't say I didn't know where it came from--I said I didn't see any basis for it. I acknowledge that it is a lie propagated to enslave people rooted in a sick worldview that resulted from the cultural equivalent of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Healthy cultures, such as the Polynesians, don't believe in sin. Only cultures that are sick and neurotic as a result of being in a state of powerlessness believe in sin.

Freiheit

I think Jhuger makes a good reply to this type of argument in his "Questions for Bible Thumpers" essay (http://www.jhuger.com/biblethumpers.php):

Or as I say in my splash page essay "Thoughts on Christianity, etc." (http://caxton.stockton.edu/freiheit/...storyReader$25):

Anyone can change the bible around anyway they want to say anything they want. I wouldn't really call that a religion, though, I would call that a personal philosophy. I also wouldn't call it relying on the bible--you're using the bible for inspiration in the same way people use tea leaves or ink blots for inspiration.

911

Truth is not whatever what someone believes. What YOU believe to be truth is that which will have the biggest impact on YOUR life.

The question "what is truth" becomes moot when something is beyond the perimeters of science. Anthing not proven and or not falsifiable; science will not and cannot observe.

Things that are proven and observed to be true; well you are stupid not to believe.

Things that are outside the perimeters of science; what you believe, that is the truth. So be careful what you believe or discard as truth or untruth.

Freiheit

Yes. Thank you.

okaay...

Nope. If something is important enough to speculate on it is too important to take on faith.

So you're saying "I don't know what's on the other side of this wall, so I get to make up whatever I want." This is a common fallacy in logic known as an appeal to ignorance. "We don't know, therefore it is this." Wrong. We don't know, therefore we cannot say anything about it." Your choice to believe is thus no more than a guess. And why do you do that? Afraid of going to hell? But as far as we know, you could go to hell for being a christian. Nothing gained.

And things that you don't know about you are just as stupid to assert knowledge about.

Nope. To assert that something is the truth when you don't know is stupid. Please reconcile:

That's right. And I hope you have been wearing your full pirate regalia while kissing hank's ass.

911

With something unknown, you can as you say: "I don't know and leave it at that." Since: "But as far as we know, you could go to hell for being a christian. Nothing gained." When you talk about "hell" you are jumping the gun a little if I may say so.

or

You can believe in Santa and say "well, nothing came out of that did it?"

or

You can believe in God and say "well, now I know God and God is God."

You see God is God is meaningless to everyone else but God is God is meaningful to people who have met God.