"Christianity that is based on a man necessarily being tortured to death on a Roman cross. It just doesn’t have ‘the ring of truth’ for me."

Without pain, without sacrifice we would have nothing. It has a ring of truthiness to me. God knew this, and God showed us that through the torture of his only son. Because of man's mental independence, and thus impudence, there was no other way to express this fact.

Alan Grey, shame on you.

>>the statement is self-refuting. That is, it must be false. This can be easily high-lighted by asking you the question. "Do you really believe that?" If you do belive that, then your belief is also not a case of what is real or not and we can happily dismiss it as irrelevant. If you don't believe that, then it is also irrelevant<<

This is verbal manipulation, nothing more.

Along the lines of that old chestnut "when did you stop beating your wife?", or "everything I say is a lie."

A belief remains a belief, totally separated from "reality" by the simple fact that it is not reality, but a belief.

They are two entirely different concepts, as Evan so clearly states, "Belief is not a case of what is real or not, it's just belief"

Your attempt to prove that belief is self contradictory by comparing it with reality is a bit like saying that Sydney does not exist because it is not Melbourne.

If you properly parse your statement above, what you are left with is the statement that "belief is irrelevant"

What you really mean of course is that "what you believe is irrelevant, compared to what I believe". But you couldn't come out and say that because it would sound arrogant, wouldn't it?

Boaz, I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that I "gave far too much attention to the peripheral" in my observations on the Welsh Revival.

(I'm not sure either about your reference to "tongues" - I certainly didn't mention them.)

>>To attribute the overall momentum of the Welsh or any major evangelical awakening to nothing more than mass hysteria or simply 'Mosely like' group dynamics is to miss the mark entirely.<<

In what way does it miss the mark? In both cases, a gifted rhetorician fired up a community to do stuff that they wouldn't have done before. In both cases the effect was short-lived, testifying to the vacuity of the message itself.

In both cases there was a small but identifiable residual effect, where even today a little old lady will continue to bear witness (or whatever the appropriate phrase might be) to the message of Evan, while in the murkier depths of British Fascism there still exist those who consider Mosely a hero, and his detractors, traitors.

>>f you look at social conditions prior to and after... you will find they were of lasting and redeeming social value, based on the spiritual change in the hearts of those touched by it.<<

Your evidence for this is....?

Hi Evan,

I am a Christian. I believe in the Words of Jesus Christ.

I believe Bible is a guide for me.

I have experienced in my life 'the Truth'. I have seen with my own eyes, people who got healed by Prayer.

If you say that is false, then it's ok. But, you can't kill my Testimony, My Witness, My facts.. Can you?

Shame on you pericles. You're smarter than that.

Evan's comments are self-refuting nonsense. It implicitly tries to put his own beliefs on a priveledged level, where he can call other beliefs 'absurd' whilst protecting himself and his own from criticism.

Beliefs are things we believe. Why do we believe them? Because we think they are true. (By definition, you cannot believe something you think is false) What do we mean by 'true'? That is accurately reflects reality.

Trying to seperate belief from reality is ridiculous and nonsensical. That you can't see that bodes badly for our education system.

FYI, the 'when did you stop beating your wife' thing isn't self-referential, and 'everything I say is a lie' is obviously false. Both attempt to force you into a false dichotomy, and both can easily be escaped by showing there is an alternative answer to the dichotomy proposed. There is no such escape for the statement 'belief is not a case of what is real or not'? Especially when Evan so clearly was talking about reality. It isn't possible as even your own belief shows that. Which belief? Where you said 'A belief remains a belief, totally separated from "reality" by the simple fact that it is not reality, but a belief.'. That is a belief. Belief's can be true or false, BECAUSE they are beliefs ABOUT reality. Just as your statement is.

May be Lorese and all christian-haters (if they r aussies) hate Australian cricketers too coz

Adam Gilchrist : a devout christian : Partner of World Vision
Brett Lee : Salvation Army
Matthew Hayden , Justin Langer, Simon Katich etc., ... professed christians
Even Ricky Ponting got influenced by his devout 'christian' wife.

I wonder in thier drivel of hate, they support Pakistan or India over Australia.