//teaching people to believe (in whatever) rather than to actually come closer to God.//

Who apparently doesn't exist, so what's the point in coming closer to him? How is that even possible? You're talking nonsense, Yuyutsu.

continued

I have interpreted nothing to support a prejudice. The Christian heritage includes persecution of pagans, massacres of Jews and heretics, the Inquisition, the Wars of the Reformation and forced conversions. That is fact neither interpretation nor opinion. Should it be ignored?

Please question any particular act of Christianity that I have mentioned that you think cannot be substantiated.

In my opinion the combination of assent to unprovable propositions and a command to spread belief in those unprovable propositions flawed Christianity from its beginnings, and the atrocities mentioned above were a logical consequence. God, Satan, the Trinity, the virgin birth, heaven, God in human or other material shape, original sin, hell and the afterlife all seem to me a farrago of nonsense. If someone came up to me and said “I am the way, the truth, the life” I would say he was suffering from delusions of grandeur even if his name was Jesus. The foregoing is opinion.

I have had a Jewish education. One of the things that bothers me about Christianity is the attempts to convert me. Generally a polite dismissal is not enough for the missionary. I tell people my beliefs, but I don’t try to push them on anybody. I am now an atheist who once believed in God and tried to be religious. I have been asked if I was a Christian. Sometimes it is necessary to correct people who assume I am. Quite often I have been told that he or she hopes I will become a Christian. They are incapable of seeing how rude and intrusive that is. I have never told anyone that I hope they will become an atheist. I think it would be for the better if all religions disappeared, but I would not hurt a believer by telling them that I hoped they would abandon their faith. The missionaries show no such restraint.

I have written a number of articles for olo.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/author.asp?id=4977 directs you to them.

I hope you will accept a difference of opinion in future without accusing a person who differs with you of being prejudiced.

Dear Toni,

You seem to be obsessed with this question of existence, but that's only because you subjectively consider it important. I don't.

In fact, valuing that which exists and devaluing that which doesn't, is synonymous with materialism.

//In fact, valuing that which exists and devaluing that which doesn't, is synonymous with materialism.//

No, materialism is the view that all phenomena are fundamentally material in nature. I accept the existence of non-material phenomena. I don't accept that non-existent things exist because that doesn't make any kind of sense.

Dear Sells,

I would appreciate an apology from you for labeling me prejudiced.

Dear Toni,

Whatever exists, is material.
Materialism is the belief that matter is important and behaving accordingly.

Phenomena are things that occur. As such they are bound by time, space and causality.

It is possible (though not proven) that certain phenomena are not subject to the ordinary laws of physics, but even if so, that wouldn't render them non-material, but only a different kind of matter.

Who anyway ever claimed that non-existent things exist?