Rational BAC

Have heard that circular argument before. I don't think I am being circular at all. Makes sense to me anyway---------a lot more logical and rational a position than either the Fundies or the non-theists.

If you go from the assumption that the Bible is man made and that God stayed out of it, just let Man figure the whole thing out------then cherry picking the Bible is quite valid and I would say the only way to go.

You can say that whatever happened 2000 years ago was a completely made up tall tale that got out of hand. As some non-theists do. That does not seem very likely to me, but to each his own judgement on that one.

Or you can say that SOMETHING happened 2000 years ago and must have seemed to be awfully important to quite a few people.

And all you have to go on is the errant Bible------------what can you do but cherry pick and try to make rational but of course many times very subjective decisions for yourself the meaning of what happened 2000 years ago.

Rational BAC

Celsus---

And I was an agnostic for many years. There is a big difference between my position today and my position as an agnostic.

And the difference is "faith" Hell---as irrational as it may seem (never said I was 100% rational)--------------I just believe it without any proof of it at all.

And that is probably something neither an atheist nor an agnostic could ever understand. All can do is agree to disagree on that one. Since there is no comprehension of the other side's position on that by either side --theist and non-theist.

Celsus

Except that you haven't got out of the circular trap. None of what you write below shows any understanding of the problem you are in.
So would you do the same with the Bhagavid Gita, Quran, and other "holy" books?
No, that is completely misunderstanding the historical case. What we do have 2000 years ago is Paul writing about a vague Jesus of which almost nothing about his earthly life are known--and this is about 2-3 decades after Jesus supposed crucifixion (and even some of these letters have suspicious lines). Then the earliest we can possibly date the gospels is Mark in 70 CE, which is a good 4 decades after Jesus death. John, with its developed theology, is hard-pressed to fit within the first century at all. So what we do have is something that was mostly unremarkable enough that no one thought to write any of it down for at least 4 decades (but easily more) after the events.

By this time, there are competing theologies, legendary development, borrowing and conflation, and a completely unreliable account. This--you admittedly base your knowledge on--and being already suspect, you still think that you can know this suspiciously legendary Jesus well enough for him to guide you? Or is it all going on in your head? Your brief attempt at rationalising the events is both ad hoc and flimsy.
My point is simply that you are already using your rational faculties to cherry-pick, not Jesus which you admit you have a flawed idea what he was really like, because all your ideas about Jesus are circular. So why not be an agnostic?

Joel

Rational BAC

Celsus-----------

Well, I think we are talking apples and oranges, but anyway---

Will try one of those----Do I think there may be some truth in the Quran and other holy books? Sure. Why not?

I don't think anyone's spiritual life should be limited. Use any source you want. Cherry pick all you want to.

I rather prefer Christianity because of that "faith" thing I mentioned, but also because that is the religion I was brought up in ----so I am more comfortable with it.

Have said this before-----------If at the pearly gates I happen to run into Allah, I will just say "Sorry about that, I kind of thought it might be you anyway. --Heh heh" And take my chances that Allah would be a pretty nice guy about the whole thing

Muffinstuffer

Haven't you heard? They found hell while drilling in Russia somewhere. They even have tapes of people screaming.

While I personally believe in Hell, I don't think it's in Russia.

(And YES I know it's in Michigan, for those of you who are ready to post that joke once again on this board. )

Rational BAC

That was pretty good Muffin. I enjoyed that one.

Those damned old double-entendres really can be a biitch.

Muffinstuffer

Yeah I did too. As you yourself said, I think, I don't claim to be 100% rational.

Just where Hell being discovered in Russia is, I am.