To George.

The three elements you gave can apply to any religion. Even Zen. If I could add at least one or two aspects that are specific to Christianity it would be on the terms of God and on Jesus. These two elements seperate Christianity from all the other religions. Even Islam which says it acknowledges Jesus as a prophet, does not acknowledge Jesus in the same way that Christianity does. That He died for our sakes, and that He rose again.

As for the aspect of rationality after studying Christianity, or the study of any religion, or even science, I would challenge your stance that before you study, and after you study your beliefs remain more or less the same.

In my observation the more you study something, religious or scientific, the more it challenges you and your previous views. This doesn't revert back to old views ones you get it all sorted out for yourself. It changes your view and gives you something to strive for that is different then before you studied. The only exception would be if your conclusions after studying matched the cultural foundation that gave you your ideals before studying. I don't think such a cultural foundation exists though that is not challenged by the study of Christianity.

The more you know the more you change. So much so that it can be applied by saying what you know and what you are exposed to, affects what changes in you. What you feed your focus on will influence you and change you. You don't remain more the same after further deeper study.

To Alan B.

Your views of Christianity are full of crap. I know that sounds harsh, but the truth is that your views of Christianity do not represent Christian views at all. The views you hold of Christianity are inaccurate of what it means to be a Christian. In Georges's article he made one good point that could be applied to you very well. An atheist describing religion is like a blind man describing color.

This discussion of the rationality of Christianity might be a good topic to explore the different rationell that Christians hold. As a Christian, I can volunteer what I've seen and what I've come across for perspectives (ways of reasoning, as well as beliefs) from within a Christian scope of reference.

There are several different Christian outlooks. Not many actually come close to your view of christian beliefs and rationell

After reading the comments above I think you should firstly ask yourselves the question Why do I not understand what religion is? Because it's obvious to me that none of you have a clue what religion is, apart from describing the obvious overt characteristics that even a five year old can see.

Most of what you guys say is just mumbo jumbo. It's really just all about you guys trying to make yourselves look educated and knowledgeable. I'm starting to call it the One Dollar Brain Syndrome.

Runner said that "surely for mathematical laws and all other laws their is a Lawmaker".
This is an example of an entrenched belief in the existence of some form of supreme being.
Things evolve, created by their environmental conditions, not by the will of some fictitious "lawmaker".
Laws are conditions of behaviour set and observed by human beings in response to prevailing conduct.

.

Dear George,

.

Welcome back …

If you don’t mind my saying so, George, I have difficulty imagining how a person so deeply religious as yourself, with such profound, unwavering faith in the god hypothesis, could possibly indulge in any form of rational thought independently of your longstanding personal convictions.

It is indispensable, in my view, that certain basic principles be respected during such endeavours :

1. "Affirmati non neganti incumbit probatio" – “the burden of proof is upon him who affirms - not on him who denies." It is the duty of the person who asserts something to produce evidence in order to prove it

2. Also, one cannot be judge and party. He who judges must be independent, with no preconceived ideas on the question to be judged

So, in the absence of good, solid, empirical evidence, the god hypothesis remains just that : a hypothesis.

Our minds are free to roam among the stars, way beyond the universe if we choose – but it’s better to keep our feet planted firmly on the ground.

Here and now is all that"s sure.

.

There is an accurate historical record that supports all I've written here. Those that never ever bother to read are the ones full of crap, cyberbullies posting here.

Jesus was a Jew! And a Rabbi ( teacher) and itinerant worker.

History tells us he fled from Israel aged twelve to avoid persecution and possible assassination to the land we now know as India, and while there was exposed to an early form of Buddhism, which predated Christianity by a thousand years.

Some believe he even became a Buddhist and a member of the Essene sect. Who were extremely knowledgeable in virtually all the then known herbal remedies/medicine.

This association would explain why a returning thirty-year-old Jesus would tech a philosophy that has many commonalities with Buddhism and his art as a healer. And his turn the other cheek pacifist philosophy and sharing!?

. And why when in a heated debate with Nicodemus, he said verily, verily ( truly, truly) I say unto you, to reach unto the kingdom of heaven, ye must be born again. (reincarnation)

And a foundation belief for all Buddhists, Hindus and numerous other eastern philosophies and some early Jewish belief systems like Zoster? If you cannot bother to study history, don't label crap the wisdom of those who have, simply because history challenged and inculcated from birth, false teachings, or as an early writer would have put it, crap!
Alan B.