This debate/ conflict / argument/ discourse / conversation between Christians and the greater world occurs because Christians are dictating to us others of the world what we should think , who we should worship , what we should believe , how we should organise society , how we should treat those who do not join in.

We are asked to give up freedom for servitude, justice for dogma, to view women and others as inferior and to disrespect others for their differences and other competing ideologies. We are asked to give control over to those who throughout history proved that they cannot handle that control.

I do not expect Christians to be capable of seeing or understanding an exterior point of view. To go to church is to see the ego on a pedestal. Hands open palms to the air, eyes rolled back to the head or hands clasped together with eyes shut in total immersion within the self. The preaching always about self improvement, self comparison, self values it dawns on a very few that the motivational jingoism attempted by preachers does not work or only one visit would suffice.

The most important message in the sermon is loyalty to the institution , the corporation has Jesus as uts logo after all. If Ronald McDonald means fun, Jesus means moral, burgers and fries make for fat bodies; Jesus makes for fat egos. Christians are good for the sole reason they say they are good, god exists for the sole reason they say he exists, Christian values are moral because Christians say they are moral, history never occurred because Christians say history never occurred. Christianity is a cult of dictators, an obvious inheritance from the Romans. This debate/ conflict / argument/ discourse / conversation between Christians and the greater world occurs because Christians are dictating to us.

"I do not expect Christians to be capable of seeing or understanding an exterior point of view." - West

They are immersed in a performance, have an investment in a faith and usually have views reinforced by a peer group.

Even if you wish believe in a God, it would seem logical to read the form guides of The Gods. But Christians are confidently Christians, Muslims, Muslisms and Jews, Jewish. And none will willingly stand back and look politico-social constructs involved.

Although, I guess I shouldn't make generalisations: I know a cleric, who started collecting research on comparative religions for a post-grad. theological degree [Masters?]and became an athiest based on he read. He said to me, said it would wonderful to be have been true, "but it isn't". Telling his family was hard.

West,

I think we have been left agreeing each other and reading Dawkins?

Hope we were able to encourage others to manage knowledge discovery in more plaucible ways and help waterboy and Philoto understand civilised peolpes do not require a guy with a long white beard watching them in the W.C.

For me a major disappointment has been how hands of Sells is, given he is a prolific writer. Perhaps, he too, was a touch of Olympus Syndrome?

Peace,

O.

Oliver and West, while you appear to be revelling in having the last word in this thread, nothing has been won here.
You perhaps have shown more aggression and persistance than the God/soul advocates but you haven't convinced anyone that your own materialist beliefs (and they are beliefs) are superior.
You fail to recognise that you as well as Philo and waterboy and myself are all believers to some degree. An adamant materialist is of the same colouring as a stubborn religionist, so certain and self-assured in their own views and beliefs that they are unable to consider alternate theories and instead only attack anything that challenges their own.

The materialist hero of the 21st century appears to be Richard Dawkins and it is clear that you both revere him, however he is also overly self-confident in his own rightness.
A valid criticism of Dawkins is made here by Steven Unwin: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1883586,00.html

It is also noteworthy that Dawkins himself admits the incompleteness of his own materialistic doctrine by his inability to explain qualia:
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dawkins_pinker/debate_p4.html

Dawkins chooses to *believe* that the materialist theory is true and will one day encompass all, but for the moment beliefs will suffice on the matter. It seems you both do the same.

So to make my point again: we are all to some degree believers in that which we are not and can not be sure of.
As this is a symptom that West has described as a mental problem, perhaps we should all be diagnosed with the same physchological label that would be given a religionist. Perhaps that label should be "human".

Oliver it appears the wrestling has moved to "An uneasy marriage of necessity". Religion in politics.

I have friends in the U.S and Canada , all ex theologian students all atheists. An awarness of history seems to be the true enlightener. Certainly in any discipline it is the basic tool box for both theorist and practitioner. Apparently history is gods Kryptonite. I used to know a Catholic priest who had a theory that the devil was symbolic of truth , based on genisis. We used to enjoy a good argument but in hind sight I now see he was grappling with what is a proposterous belief and admirably trying to translate the bible to fit in with reality. I would argue a victim of wanting to know. This is not understood by the religious , the motivation of the scientist is to actually know , any easy answer is not good enough if it not the truth. Religion is emotion, it is not about knowledge, reality is irrelevant. Religion is emotion thus ego centred.

This is why it is important for Donnie to get in the last word on behalf of Jesus Ha Ha.

Donnie I am clean of superstition thus disproving your assertion. When I give to charity it is because I got it , they need it. Its that simple. A rose smells sweet because the nerves in my nostrils and brain interpret it that way and I like the smell and it evokes a chemical cocktail of happiness. Intellectually I appreciate nature. I am an organism from a long line of organisms in the environment of organism society.

I have ego just like Christians, the difference is I dont worship mine. I have emotions just like Christians the difference is I know my emotions are emotions , I am aware of my emotions. I ask questions just like Christians , the difference is I want to know the real answer and not just a slogan to reinforce what I want to hear.

I guess thats it ,

fairwell chaps.

West, you simply substitute belief in God or belief in the soul for belief in the ego. You believe in the materialist brain theory. You are a "religionist" in the cult of Anti-religion.

But good on you for unselfishly giving to charity, and good on you for wanting to know the real answers. These are both admirable qualities in my opinion.

And this is true for good scientists:
" the motivation of the scientist is to actually know , any easy answer is not good enough if it not the truth."
Real scientists do not rule out the unfavourable or the improbable when they have not proven the favourable or the probable. This works both ways in the religion debate too.