I'm having difficulty discerning any logical track here, Trav.

>>Your [bennie's] post is loaded with presuppositions and assumptions, and they aren't necessarily ones I share, so it may be difficult for us to find common ground.<<

You seem to be saying that you have different presuppositions and assumptions.

Fair enough, but what are they?

Can we assume these, from a previous post of yours?

>>Jesus Christ suffered the most painful death possible, and conquered this horrific death by rising from the dead<<

There's a classic example of multiple and sequential presuppositions/assumptions, piled on top of each other like prisoners in Abu Ghraib.

Are those the ones you mean? But...

>>according to the census, 68% of Aussies are Christians. In reality, the vast majority are "practical atheists"<<

Is this a presupposition, or an assumption? Because on its own, it is pretty meaningless.

>>Christianity is worldwide, just as science is.<<

Well, yes. So are bacteria. So is weather. Neither is dependent on the other.

>>There isn't another faith which is as evenly spread around the world as Christianity.<<

But nitrogen is pretty evenly spread as well, and you don't find many people proclaiming a faith in nitrogen.

Except some farmers, perhaps.

>>In 1900, there were 7 million Christians living in Africa. By 2000, there was closer to 400 million... So that's Africa, a poor and uneducated land.<<

I'm guessing the irony is unintentional.

>>America- it's the most powerful nations in the world and one of the most educated, yet has more Christians than any other country<<

But... how do we know that they aren't "practical atheists" too?

There seem to be a few internal contradictions here, Would you care to clarify?

david f's ravings complain that Christians stole the Jewish scriptures. Considering that the first Christians were Jews this is a bit rich. Did the Christians steal the Hebrew Jewish Scriptures or the Greek Jewish Scriptures?
Secondly, Christians do not call the Jewish Scriptures "Christian". They are identified as the Old Testament or as the Jewish Scriptures.

Of course, Jesus being Jewish, would have used the Jewish Scriptures(nothing new there).

I'm intrigued re the statement: "....and the new stuff that he (Jesus) said wasn't good".What stuff wasn't good, whatever good means in david f's mind?

The last para is a doozy.....(1)Newton. According to the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Newton "possessed a deep religious sense, venerated the Bible and accepted its account of creation. In late editions of his scientific works he expressed a strong sense of God's providential role in nature". I'm not sure if david f will want to celebrate Newton's birthday after learning of this!
(2)Darwin, fairly irrelevant to life but a racist whose work inspired the Nazis no end.
(3)three wise men. I wouldn,t lose any sleep if they never existed.

Dear Francis,

What inspired the Nazis was not Darwin, but racist thought and Christian religious prejudice that predated Darwin. The holocaust would have been impossible without the years of hatred for Jews promoted by both the Catholic and Lutheran churches. The Nazi newspaper, Volkischer Beobachter, could print Luther's hate sermons verbatim. The Holocaust was applied Christianity.

The earliest Christians were Jews, but they were largely wiped out with the failure of the Bar Kochba revolt in 70 CE. Paul gathered mostly gentiles who expressed their hatred for the Jews in New Testament Scripture. It was easy to blame Jews for Jesus' death because the Christians wanted to live under the Romans so did not want to blame the Roman rulers who actually were in control. Anglican Bishop Spong in "Sins of Scripture" has examined the Bible as a vehicle for hate.

The Greek translation converted the Hebrew, alma, meaning young woman into parthenos, meaning virgin. In the prophesy of Isaiah a young woman shall conceive was translated into a prophesy of the virgin birth. Actually the Old Testament appearing in the Christian Bible is not the same as the Jewish Bible. The foregoing regarding the virgin birth is one of many examples where the Jewish Bible was edited and changed into the Old Testament.

Jesus is one of the many false messiahs in Jewish history. You can tell a false messiah because he doesn't usher in a messianic age. He doesn't have to come back to do it because he gets it right the first time.

Isaac Newton was an extremely intelligent man who accepted the superstitions current at his time. Charles Darwin was no racist, but a kindly and gentle person whose work is basic to the current life sciences.

Bennie

Loved your post - science does not distinguish between race, colour, gender or religion.

But religion - most of what religion does is divisive,for example, "you don't believe in my version of christianity AND you read Harry Potter? You're a witch!"

The above is one of the more absurd claims from our religious mafia.

Science can change according to new evidence; religion will only accept the bits that fit in with its dogma and condemns the rest.

Blind AND awful.

Bennie wrote:

I would suggest Newton and Darwin have had more effect on today's world than Jesus, for the simple reason there is only one science while there are multitudes of faiths, even within Christianity. What's more, science is consistent in every language, every culture, every age. If someone makes a silly claim you can prove them wrong.

Dear bennie,

I wish your statement were true. Unfortunately many religionists believe there is only one true faith – the one they happen to believe in even if it is only by the accident of birth. One bad thing about it is that they believe in propositions that cannot be proven wrong. It seems obvious to me that death is the end of life, but I certainly can’t prove it to someone who believes otherwise.

If someone makes a statement that the wavelength of red light is four angstroms it is possible to check it. If someone talks about eternal life it sounds like complete rubbish to me, but there is no way to check it.

Of course people who call themselves Christians all reject the religion of Jesus since he was not a Christian. I post the following as advice for them so they can return to the ‘true’ faith - the faith of Jesus. It should be sung to the tune of the old jazz standard.

The Imitation of Christ

Six feet two, eyes of blue
Jesus Christ, he was a Jew
Has anybody seen my lord?

Big hooked nose, There he goes
Preaching so that everyone knows
Has anybody seen my lord?

Speared by a Roman
In the abdomen
Blood gushing out

Rose from the dead
So it is said
People believe without a doubt

Jesus died, still a Jew
He's a Jew so why aren't you?
Has anybody seen my lord?

Pericles, allow me to clarify my "contradictions":
"
>>Jesus Christ suffered the most painful death possible, and conquered this horrific death by rising from the dead<<

There's a classic example of multiple and sequential presuppositions/assumptions, piled on top of each other like prisoners in Abu Ghraib."

The only presupposition you need to believe my statement is that miracles might be possible. You need to, at very least, have an agnostic attitude towards the possibility of miracles. If you're a complete naturalist and will a priori dismiss any claims of miracles despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary, then it isnt possible for you to believe that someone rose from the dead. Other than that, no presuppositons are required, just a rational mind and the ability to "follow the evidence where it leads".

">>according to the census, 68% of Aussies are Christians. In reality, the vast majority are "practical atheists"<<

Is this a presupposition, or an assumption?"

Neither.

By practical atheist I mean not church going and Not actively worshipping (this does not necessarily mean church) the God they claim to believe in.

">>Christianity is worldwide, just as science is.<<

Well, yes. So are bacteria. So is weather. Neither is dependent on the other."

Correct, I never claimed otherwise. Please re read my post and the context of my reply.

"

>>America- it's the most powerful nations in the world and one of the most educated, yet has more Christians than any other country<<

But... how do we know that they aren't "practical atheists" too?"

40% of Americans regularly attend church, according to recent research. Therefore not as many practical atheists, according to my criteria