Yuyutsu,

The topic of this thread is: 'Where’s the Prime Minister on the free speech crisis?' You stated:

<<the existence of religion does not depend on God's existence nor on the veracity of the bible. While we could discuss these issues, even enjoy so, for the purpose of this discussion, these are red herrings.>>

To the contrary, the existence of the Christian religion depends on God's existence and the reliability of the Bible. 'Anyone who wants to come to him [God] must believe that God exists and that he rewards those who sincerely seek him' (Hebrews 11:6).

Jesus' teaching on the veracity of the OT was: 'Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished' (Matthew 5:17-18).

As for the reliability of the Bible: 'All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work' (2 Timothy 3:16-17). External evidence confirms its trustworthiness.

This was verified in 2015 by 2,500 year old Babylonian tablets discovered in Iraq that

'... provide a glimpse of Jewish life in Babylonian exile. Put simply, the tablets corroborate the Biblical tale. They describe a town called Al-Yahudu i.e., “the village of the Jews”, by the river Chebar, mentioned in Ezekiel 1:1. They also attest to Judaic names such as “Gedalyahu”, “Hanan”, “Dana”, “Shaltiel” and a man with the same name as Israel’s current Prime Minister, “Netanyahu”. The “yahu” ending to these names is called “theophoric”, meaning, they attest to a belief in the God of the Torah, by including part of God’s name in people’s personal names….’ Further details are at: http://www.huffpost.com/entry/2500-year-old-jewish-tabl_b_6579996

The HuffPost, a secular source, concluded: ‘This discovery is a remarkable confirmation of the historical reliability of the Biblical text’.

Dear Spencer,

Thank you for correcting me on the topic of this thread.

In any case, it seems that we are getting further and further from the topic, so I will try to be brief.

«the existence of the Christian religion depends on God's existence and the reliability of the Bible.»

I fail to see why this must be so:
One could still follow Jesus' footsteps and teachings irrespective of the Bible's reliability or otherwise; and as for Hebrews 11:6, assuming that the translation is correct (so the Greek words used for "believe" and "exist" are anything similar to our modern/scientific understanding of 'belief' and 'existence') and assuming that the belief in the existence of God (as opposed to having FAITH in God!) is such an essential part of the Christian religion, nothing stops anyone from believing that God exists, even if He does not.

As I see it, the claim as if God exists is actually an insult to God, because Existence itself is in God, because it is nonsensical and outrageous to speak of, or even try to imagine, an Existence that is outside or independent of God. That claim implies a limited finite God, reduced to the role of an object within His own creation... what a heresy, if not even idolatry.

In any case, on Friday, Altrav wrote that "religion doesn't exist", as well as "I [=Altrav] realised the Bible, in fact ALL so called religious scripts, are in fact 'fiction'.". While failing to explain how s/he arrived at this conclusion,his/her remarks are clearly not limited to Christianity.

«Jesus' teaching on the veracity of the OT was...»

Assuming this was indeed his teaching, rather than perhaps some misunderstanding by his disciple, but we need not even speculate and go that far if only we note the differences between "the law and the prophets" and the OT (which was not yet finalised at Jesus' times).

Yuyutsu, I realise we are well off topic by now, but maybe so far off that it might be considered a more interesting one than what a moron like a PM thinks about ANYTHING!
Anyway to answer your question about how I arrived at my remarks about religions and the conclusions I spoke of.
Well over time, I came to realise that at no time did God show himself to anyone thereby giving rise to the fact that his existance was the creation of a human.
Then I began to disseminate the various passages and teachings of the Bible.
With only 350 word limit, I cannot explain all that needs to be said, but I will go with a few examples.
The Bible is full of references, acording to LUKE, or JOHN, or MATHEW.
There is nothing which gives us any insight into God actually existing in some physical or tangible form.
Then there are the 'miracles'.
I won't bother describing them because you can pick anyone of them and see that without modern technology as used on a movie set, they are impossible to have happened as described in the Bible.
Now I realise that religion became a means of controlling people by the Pope's of the day.
People were much more gullible and ignorant than those today, (actually that's not quite true) so I thought, but it turns out that people are still just as ignorant as those 2000 years ago.
We are told that to believe in God we only have to let ourselves believe in him and that he exists, and that is how we know he exists.
Well I'm sorry, that is reverse engineering, a double negative, and so on.
No, I'm sorry guys, you can believe in whatever thing makes you happy, I on the other hand will keep on believing in the one entity that I am familiar and comfortable with, that I can rely on to guide me through life and all it's variables.
When asked, then what or who do I believe in?
'ME', 'MYSELF' and 'I'!

ALTRAV,

<<Well over time, I came to realise that at no time did God show himself to anyone thereby giving rise to the fact that his existance (sic) was the creation of a human.>>

I hope you recognise how ignorant this statement is. You have never known all people who have ever lived since the beginning of time. So to state that "at no time did God show himself to anyone" is to make a an unproven statement.

Sounds more like your presuppositions speaking - without the evidence to support your claim.

OzSpen, Come on.
Really?
If such a monumental event ever happened there would be untold historical records, not only in the scriptures but from every other form of communication of the day.
Heck, in the twenty first century the POPE?, goes anywhere, it becomes 'world news'.
Don't you think the archeologists would have discovered something by now?
There just IS NOT any evidence of God showing himself to 'the people'.
We cannot take the word of 'disciples', they have a vested interest.
Just look at it by comparison to todays con-men.
See any difference?

Dear Altrav,

You mainly commented about Christianity rather than about religion, which existed from time immemorial. If your claim is that Christianity is not a religion, then I suggest that you best take that up with the Christians of this forum rather than with myself.

«There is nothing which gives us any insight into God actually existing in some physical or tangible form.»

And thank goodness for that: just suppose God actually existed with a physical/tangible form, then He would no longer be God, but rather an idol!

«Then there are the 'miracles'.»

Even thousands of years before Christianity there were people who used the power of their minds to do things that we cannot achieve even with modern technology. It is just a different technology, but call these "miracles" if you prefer.

«Now I realise that religion became a means of controlling people by the Pope's of the day.»

Due to deficiencies in human character, there were and still are charlatans who abused others in the name of religion. This has nothing to do with religion itself, which leads to freedom rather than bondage.

«but it turns out that people are still just as ignorant as those 2000 years ago.»

True: to think that one is only a body, to think that once that body dies there will be nothing and that one's actions will bear no lasting consequences, this is deep ignorance.

«We are told that to believe in God we only have to let ourselves believe in him and that he exists»

Indeed we ought to have faith in God, always, but believing that He exists is a silly distortion as well as a logical contradiction.

«When asked, then what or who do I believe in?
'ME', 'MYSELF' and 'I'!»

Excellent: this should incentivise you to find out who you are!
At the end of the road you will discover that you are none other than God, but don't take my word for it: you are not there yet and the road ahead is long, so why not remain open to experience yourself in new ways?