This quote seems very applicable to Hillsong and indeed all of what is usually called "religion".

All "religion" is a theatrically-conceived magic-show of suggestive ideas and make-believe performances, specifically intended to divert, entertain, and (either with or without mutual agreement and consent) DECEIVE. Although the institutionalized justification for the playful deception is the compassionate-rationalization that it makes people FEEL better.

All "religion" is a playful effort to console by means of deception---much as parents do with young children (by exercising the faculties of fantasy, until the child "grows up", and inevitably, and RIGHTLY, ceases to believe in the nursery stories of childhood's time of nurturing).

The proposing of "religious" myths and illusions has a traditional function in the domain of childhood---but the world of truly and responsibly adult life requires a mature and truly civilized culture, founded in Reality Itself.

The thus culture of illusionism is the culture of make-believe, engaged for the purpose of pacifying primitive of infantile human emotions, and, especially, the infantile fear of death.

All illusionists voluntarily and strategically deceive others, and even themselves, on the basis of a culturally-ingrained acceptance of the principle (and a categorical presumption of the inherent moral rightness) of the compassionate-rationalization---such that they are willing and able to believe and act AS IF doing FALSELY is doing GOOD.

All who believe in such illusions and therefore accept illusions as "objectively real", VOLUNTEER to be thus tricked and deluded. And they do so for their own, usually uninspected, reasons, but, in general, because it makes them FEEL better in the midst of the suffering that is the usual human condition.

"Religion" is mental, emotional and physical method, or an ego-based strategy for seeking what has presumed to be lost, absent, or not yet attained.

"Religion", characteristically, seeks its proposed goal by means of the efforts of the social ego---and those means are most characteristically, the performance of "religiously"-idealized social virtues, and other, often sex=paranoid, or moralistically, and even puritanically, conceived behaviours.

"Religion" is a form of pious but nonetheless childish consumerism, full of posturing, bargain-hunting, haggling, and deceitful practices of all kinds, whereby the presumed separate self, or the client-like ego-"I", whether as an individual or socially-defined cultural collective, seeks to acquire what, from the egoic and psycho-physical point of view, is desired, or whatever "objectively"-defined condition, thing, or state the proprietary "God" can provide to satisfy the always wanting-demanding ego-"I" itself.

The "religious" form of the consumer ego wants and seeks, as if in a marketplace, what it can beg, take, somehow earn, or otherwise acquire from the presumed storeowning-shopkeeper "God".

The consumer ego uses "religious" means to seek and demand what the parent-like "God" can do for the alternately childish and otherwise adolescent ego-"I" in the midst of its vulnerable and unsatisfactory conditions of life. "God" thus becomes the presumed executive-supplier, manager, middleman, and hoarder of the desired commodities or "goods".

Sorry Ho Hum.

But Ho hum.

If you havent had first hand experience of The Holy Spirit at work you dont know what you are talking about.

You need to get into a lively christian church and watch... and let God touch you.

Thats real life experience.

Then you can testify.

I'd prefer my kids be inside Hillsong than inside Long Bay jail.

Just what is first hand experience of the holy spirit, Gibo? Ho Hum has pretty well ruled out accepting anything on face value, or unquestioningly believing something taught at an impressionable age.

As a child I went to many church services and never had this 'experience' you mention. Many years later I attended a pentecostal service (the preacher, observing I wasn't talking in tongues like the rest of the crowd, even tried to convert me there and then. Fortunately, I didn't hyperventilate and pass out like some others did) and still didn't take anything from it, except the realisation people believe the strangest things sometimes.

No Gibo, either you're a believer or you're not. There's a god gene some of us simply don't have.

That said, it doesn't mean we don't lack a moral compass, as Truthnow78 smugly suggests. It does mean we reject supernaturalism. THAT's 'real life'.

How strange that Andrew Prior can recognise and repudiate the massive con job carried out by the evangelical churches but still describes himself as a Christian. Perhaps in another article he could try and identify any logical and empirical reasons to believe in established Christian doctrine which don't also count as reasons to believe in Hillsong? Those wicked Fundamentalists who act as if the Bible (or the Koran) is true are just following the precepts of their faith. Exodus 22:18, for instance, says quite clearly: 'You shall not suffer a witch to live', so if you haven't had a potshot at a Wiccan today then you're not taking the whole thing seriously enough.

Re the comments: I agree with Gibo that personal revelation trumps any amount of reasoning and logic, but I would like to know how he distinguishes his own case from that of the schizophrenics who are convinced that the CIA are controlling their minds via radio waves. Their personal experience is pretty convincing too. If the only touchstone of truth is personal experience, then how can anyone ever be wrong?

And Bennie's 'god gene' theory doesn't explain why roughly 150 Australians every day -- according the the Census -- are renouncing belief in any religion. Maybe the lessons learnt at Hillsong are spreading to the wider community after all.