Rational BAC

Kevbo---

I don't think there is much doubt about that part. Have seen the figures, but don't have them at hand.

Anyway Christianity is #1 by a large margin.

Islam is #2--------but not even a close #2

The rest are almost inconsequential when compared to the 2 biggies. ----------although there are quite a few Buddhists and Hindus.

Starboy

It doesn’t sound like you are cherry pickin at all. If you were you could at least answer the questions about what you think is inerrant. What it sounds like to me is that you are using the bible like some kinda ouija board. None of it is right or wrong, you just take the bits that you can use and interpret them to deal with whatever issues you have at any point in time. If that is so then why limit yourself to the bible? Just about any book would do, even the yellow pages.

Starboy

Rational BAC

I will go into the parts of the Bible that I think are valid and the parts that I think are invalid-----I don't plan to dodge that at all.

But that would be a very long post and it is late. So not tonight.

I will state right off (which I have said before) that I am using my own intelligence and my own sense of right and wrong and my own sense of logic to make my choices.

I also believe that I am also quided by my Saviour in making these choices. That is the "faith" part-------which all of us could argue forever and not agree on. So no point in going into much depth on the "faith" part. A waste of print with no solution.

I am not trying to evangelize anyone here. Just trying to show any non-theists who don't know --------that the fundamentalist Bible thumpin' Christian is just a very small minority of Christianity. If you think you are debating Christianity and making some difference when you are debating fundamentalists----------then you are wrong.

Debate every small detail in the Bible with Christian fundamentalists and think you are accomplishing anything at all is, in my opinion, bogus. You are spinning your wheels and wasting your time. But, as I always say "chacun a son gout". -------if one of your favorite hobbies is debating fundamentalist Christians, and you enjoy it, then have at it. Personally, I find fundamentalist Christians to be very boring and quite anal-retentive in their thinking.



(Assume you are joking about the yellow pages. Have no idea how to answer that one.)

Bumble Bee Tuna

here's my beef.

If the Bible was divinely inspired in some places, but not in others...How did that difference come to pass? You seem to believe that the Holy Spirit guides you in choosing the right parts of the Bible to believe. Why couldn't the Holy Spirit guide the authors of the Bible?

You really need to go in depth on what things you believe and what you don't, it's hard to discuss otherwise. For instance, is it inspired/uninspired on a per-book basis? Or is it on a per-verse basis?

If it's on a per-book basis:

Why did the Holy Spirit not guide the early church to pick the right books? The church also had a process where they picked books which matched their oral traditions, which would be coming straight from Jesus in a lot of ways. Why would that oral tradition also be wrong?

If it's on a per-verse/per-chapter basis:

Why did God pick such poor messengers? Because if parts of a book are false and parts are true, then the false parts are certainly either additions by the prophet or lies from God himself. I assume we're ruling out that God lies to us, so that means we're stuck with either a prophet adding in lies or his message getting incredibly warped. I find the warping theory to be ridiculous, since they wrote it down themselves. For warping to occur it would have to be oral and then written by someone else, or written but copied by a malicious transcriber. That just didn't happen.

So we're stuck with the lot of God's messengers being liars who can't resist making up stories. The question is, WHY? Why would they do that? Here they are, entrusted by God Himself. Why is God trusting such awful people to do his work? Why is God's revelation inadequate and needing lies? Why doesn't God punish his messengers for putting in lies? Why would God let his Divine Message, the most important thing in the world, to get corrupted???

It just makes absolutely no sense.

The question that ruins a fundamentalist is:

Why is the Bible wrong about so many things, if it's inerrant?

The question that ruins cherry pickers is:

Why does God let his message be corrupted, and how did it happen?

You really need to explain, in detail, a plausible scenario. A real, detailed description of how God's message would get corrupted, and why He would let it happen.

-B

Starboy

First off Rational BAC, thanks for taking the time to set me strait. I do not require you to list everything in the bible that you consider inerrant. I would only ask that you list those things that you think define a Christian. You don’t even have to list all of them, just two or three of the major pickins would be fine. Implicit in all your posts is the idea that the bible is the only document worth picking from. Is that so? If it is so why do you think that? Or is that another faith thing? I guess the part I am having trouble with is that if you think it is okay to pick and choose why just pick and choose from the bible? Is your faith so narrow that guidance is only forthcoming from the bible? You appear to not want to put any limits on your god, is there a reason why you place this limit on your faith or is that a revelation thing or is this limitation on your faith just a nasty old habit?

I was not joking about the yellow pages, either way you're just using the yellow pages or the bible as a ouija board. There are two explanations for any success you might think you achieve by this: 1) the Holy Spirit is working through you, so what does it matter if the source of the revelation is the bible or the yellow pages. 2) You are guiding yourself but you are dissociating your unconscious mind from your conscious mind and allowing your conscious mind to think that something else (god) is guiding you. It is just another example of the games people play. If there was a holy spirit that guides people then the bible wouldn’t be necessary.

Starboy

Ronin

So, the Non-Christians rule.

Goliath

Rational BAC,

You can make this assertion as many times as you'd like. This, however, does not make it any more believable to me.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Rational BAC

We are both correct -----------Ronin

Depends on how you look at it.

I am correct in saying that Christianity is the largest religion on Earth----which it is by far.

And you are correct in saying that, of all the people living on earth, only approximately 1/3rd profess themselves to be Christian.


I don't see any real dispute in the numbers either way.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


PS Surprising how fast this forum goes. Will get back to the other good questions when I get to it. And I will eventually list what I cherry pick from the Bible and what I leave behind--and try to give some reasons for my choices -----and I am sure my choices are debateable. But that will probably end up being a fairly long list ---especially the things I reject from the Bible. List of what I accept from the Bible is relatively short.

(essentially though much of what I pick, besides coming from what I personally believe to be valid, I also do believe I am being quided in these choices)---

--And probably that part is something a non-theist could never understand. That is OK. Not necessary to agree about everything.

Rational BAC

A lot of good questions.

Let me try Starboy's for starters anyway, because that seems to be very important to both non-theists and Christian fundamentalists (again ---very surprising how much they have in commom).


What is a Christian to me? Very simple answer --A Christian is anyone who calls himself a Christian and sincerely believes that.

That's it. That is all that is necessary for me. Why do both fundies and non-theists have such a problem with that?

Maybe I should be a little more specific though. A Christian is anyone who believes that Christ did live, and did have in his nature God-like qualities even though he was born normally and had human features.

The rest of it is a personal decision about some of the details.

I rather like the idea of a virgin birth of a mixture of God and man. Definitely on the supernatural side that is. And I think the supernatural is pretty necessary for any religion.

That is what makes Christianity pretty unique----the idea of a God and man mixture (not that the Roman gods didn't also do that one)

I also rather like the idea of a resurrection----since it gives Man at least a vague idea of understanding an afterlife.

And I think an afterlife is pretty necessary for a religion. Maybe not all that necessary, but it sure helps give people a reason to believe in something. It is a great drawing power -----giving people something they would like to have. I think almost all men are somewhat distressed thinking that their consciousness will no longer exist after death.

Now I know that many people like to limit Christianity a lot more than I do. --------------You are not a Christian unless you believe A,B,C,D, and E. -----------More power to them (just kidding) if that is what they believe--but that seems very narrow and anal retentive and egotistical==what I believe is what everyone has to believe.

Considering that most of the Christian world are cherry pickers, just like myself---------the only difference being in the degree of cherry picking------------I think Christian fundamentalists are WRONG. And I am right. And non-theists are seriously wasting their time debateing detail after Biblical detail with the fundies.

Starboy

Rational BAC, perhaps you could stop for a moment and consider the possibilities of what it may be like to be an atheist. First off I have always been an atheist, so I do not make any claims about what constitutes being a Christian. I had always thought that it revolved around Jesus, his divinity and his fulfillment of the prophecy to free Jews from some of the restrictions of the OT. According to the bible Paul is supposed to be the savior of the gentiles. Perhaps you don’t think that and frankly I don’t care. My questions are more from curiosity than anything else. Second it is other Christians that claim there are important demarcation points for being a Christian and they would think you are wrong. As an outsider the whole thing smacks of one big con game. Now I don’t care to get into the middle of it but you do share one thing in common with the fundies, the bible and Christian historical tradition plays a key role in what you know about your religion. You don’t seem to want to admit this but I have been having the dickens of a time getting you to comment on the Holy Spirit guiding you from places other than the bible.

Starboy