Ojnab

'Runner the other is a bigger myth, show me the evidence of your man written bible. '

you along with others are strong evidence of it.

I get "attacked" by Pericles for quite rightly criticizing Boxgum's untenable beliefs. Untenable because they just aint true. And yes Jesus was always and only a Jew and never ever in any sense a Christian.

True Wisdom begins by asking and really investigating at a profound depth-level, who am I (or what is the nature of Consciousness), and what do I really know about all of this beginning with my body-mind-complex and thus by extension everything else "out there".
Is there an "out there"? Or is it brain and nervous system projection created by the very subtle mechanics of the visual system - the retina and the optic nerves.
You can be sure that the usual Christian true believer has not even begun such a profound depth-level investigation.
Nobody really knows diddly squat about long the ago very dead mythological"Jesus". Certainly none of the usual self-righteous Christians who want to impose their beliefs on to everyone else.

The applied political consequences of such beliefs backed up by the bogus "great commission", means that self-righteous true believers such as Cory Bernadi and his various right wing supporters presume that they have a "divine mandate" to impose their narrow-minded sectarian views on to every one else.
Be very wary of the Christian Taliban say I. Speaking of which the USA Focus On the Family outfit is a key and influential player in the USA.

Meanwhile of course the purpose and structure of this forum allows everyone to FREELY criticize the ideas of the people who write the essays, and to freely criticise the ideas of the people that make such critical comments.

Oh, pooh-sticks Daffy Duck

>>I get "attacked" by Pericles for quite rightly criticizing Boxgum's untenable beliefs.<<

That's not an attack.

(I'm tempted to Crocodile-Dundee it a bit here, and say "THAT's an attack", but that would just be showboating.)

Whether "rightly" criticizing or not, your remarks were off-topic. The point is not whether the belief in a deity is correct or incorrect, but that religion still influences a substantial proportion of our population.

The article makes but one salient point, which is that the taxpayer should not continue to support these beliefs financially. You, quite correctly, address the issue in its political context...

>>The applied political consequences of such beliefs backed up by the bogus "great commission", means that self-righteous true believers... presume that they have a "divine mandate" to impose their narrow-minded sectarian views on to every one else.<<

In this, you and I are in agreement. But (here comes that "attack", watch out!) the beliefs themselves are irrelevant, and the financial/political concerns stand completely outside whether there is a factual or logical - or even, in your analysis, validly spiritual - foundation for those beliefs.

Ouch. I feel your pain.

Wallace provides some fair comments there, and perhaps some things Christians should take away and reflect upon. He has genuinely given Christians some food for thought. But overall, a frustrating read.

The fair comments are mixed in with ludicrous unsupported statements. Since when did Christian organisations become obsessed with growing their own wealth? What evidence does Wallace provide to think this is true? The truth is that the average Christian pastor is not very well paid at all. Another truth is that the majority of hours that people spend in Churches are unpaid hours by volunteers.

When you take out the bit about Christian organisations and churches being money hungry thieves (which is total nonsense) the article becomes nothing more than a jumbled mixture of very brief commentary on various things, without any need for some grandiose conclusion.

Separation of church and state. A good idea, but one that needs to be fleshed out in terms of exactly what it means practically, and Wallace doesn’t seriously grapple with any of the issues there. The stats suggest the western church is in continual decline? Yep. Is this due to the fall of genuine Christianity or the fall of nominalism? A fair question, but again Wallace’s concern doesn't extend to looking at the issues deeply. Rather, Wallace is just pushing an agenda here. Christians in Western countries have some challenges in integrating their faith with modern life (that is, the ones who take their faith seriously). True. I’d encourage Wallace to visit a good church where that issue is regularly wrestled with from the pulpit. Like mine, for example. And governments should never support churches or religion in any way shape or form. Sorry WHAT? How does this follow from any of the above?

Well and good, Trav. But at the end you fell into the same bad habit that you observed in Mr Wallace's article.

>>And governments should never support churches or religion in any way shape or form. Sorry WHAT? How does this follow from any of the above?<<

The "any of the above" that you presumably refer to are your own observations, so it is hardly fair to ask anyone else for an explanation.

If you were instead referring to Mr Wallace's position, I think it is reasonable to protest government money going to organizations that are, for example "obsessed with growing their own wealth". So either way, your expostulation is without credible grounds.

While I agree wholeheartedly that the article is thin gruel indeed, it does at least offer some justification for taxpayers' money to be withheld from religious organizations. If you object to this, which you appear to do, it is not unreasonable to expect you to bring forward some form of counterargument - "they should surely be supported, for x and y reason". As it is, you are simply defending a status quo merely because it is the status quo.

>>I’d encourage Wallace to visit a good church where that issue is regularly wrestled with from the pulpit. Like mine, for example<<

Fair enough. But why should it be in any way reasonable that you expect me to pay your church to conduct that wrestling? What is wrong with "user pays" in this context?

Wherever, whenever I see Christianity is under attack, I recall the lyric written by Francis Scott Key:

"And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;"

Yes, our flag is still there, enduring the rockets and bombs raining down on it from all sides. If Christianity were really abandoned, trashed, discredited, forgotten, there won't have been any relentless and ferocious attack on the faith.

It brings profound joy to my heart to see the enemies of Christianity are falling over themselves in the futile battle to uproot the "religion"; it confirms my faith and demonstrates the relevance of the idea of God, in this deep dark night.