Peter it's a lot simpler than you think.

Over two essays you still haven't made a case why your faith is the only true one and why anyone should believe in your particular dogma.

If it's any comfort, atheists don't believe in all the other gods either.

Believing Peter

What is your point?
Do you support "Separation of Church and State"?
What has separation of powers got to do with "Separation of Church and State"?
Which part of John's Gospel do you interpret as teaching "separation of powers"?
Judges are paid well (though not extravagantly by comparison with say.. manufacturers of jocks) precisely in order to prevent corruption. Given the way that they are paid, who is it that gains influence over judges' actions consequent on the payment of their salaries? (Are you particularly susceptible to conspiracy theories?)

Seems to me that the Gospels are not so much a "template for governing" as a model for protest. Unfortunately, the Church abandoned protest and the Gospel in favour of the acquisition of political power.

One can argue that Constantine, in giving the Church access to political power, silenced its prophetic voice and so corrupted it. Today, separation of powers is our insurance against despotism and the media seems to have taken over the role of watchdog. The Church struggles to find its place in todays political landscape in part because of its propensity for mindless moralising but largely because its historical participation in the exercise of state power has discredited it as a prophetic body.

Atheism is a powerful and justified criticism of the modern Church. Sells irrational 'attack' on atheists is telling in terms of the effectiveness of that criticism and his apologetic arguments seem to exmplify the Church's arrogant conservatism and determination to remain as they are.

We are fortunate to live in a society where separation of powers, separation of Church and State and freedom of the press serve to prevent excesses in the exercise of state power but this is still a fragile system and the lack of a truly prophetic Church may prove to be our "Achilles Heel".

All belief systems have their theologians, and Mr Sellick is just one of them - and not a particularly eloquent or convincing one. No doubt the ancient Inca gods had their learned defenders too, all of whom went to great lengths and daunting technical detail to "prove" that the gods needed to be appeased by cutting out living hearts. Irrationality on a broad scale is one of the defining charactertistics of the development of humans. Bertrand Russell said religions belong to "the infancy of human reason". Hallelujah to that.
But, bit by bit, the nonsense is being swept away. Some people do seem to have a need for fanciful beliefs, but fortunately it is not compulsory to adopt these beliefs any more on pain of death. It is possible to openly declare that one is an atheist - although apparently it is still compulsory for Mr Sellick to wilfully misunderstand what the word means.
The mythical atheist who stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the true nature of god while exercising cold empirical rationality in all life matters is an amusing cartoon construct. Those of us with real lives live them rather differently to that, in all their complexities. Atheism just means that we don't employ magical thinking - that we can live very happily with the world as it is and in all its NATURAL wonder.

Waterboy
<Jesus did not offer 'inner peace' but a 'Kingdom' in which justice prevailed. Jesus' own actions were thoroughly political and social, which is what led to His execution at the hands of the Romans.>

But what did Jesus say?

20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not by observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or Lo there! For, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Luke 17 KJV

It is same old problem over and over. Christianity has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus.
The classic example the 'doctoring' of the teachings of Jesus by Christianity comes at the end of the Sermon on the Mount.

28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:
29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
Matthew 7 KJV

The original Greek version is: “And when it came to pass finish Jesus words these, were astounded the crowds at the teaching of him; 29 for he was teaching them as authority having, and not as the scribes of them.”

It was the people that had the power, not Jesus.

Jesus taught personal power and responsibility based on what comes from within. Christianity has turned this into a power hungry structure based on oppression and unimaginable crimes against humanity

Re: Oliver 1 March post

I have provided several histories very recently and over time many others. With Christian theists I find at times there might be an alternative argument to empirical evidence, religion vis-a-vis science. Yet when history/anthropology take a bird's I view and "explain" religion supported by empirical evidence, all is quiet on the Christian front. Likewise, avoid discussing earlier trinities and medicants with special powers and commonalities between/across myths.

When first century Qumran documents, almost certainly unknown to Nicaea (325 CE), providing other versions of the OT are cited, Sells and others, seem not to see the real evidence against ther case. The latter a physical scrolls so their is no need for the Researcher to retreat, unless the Researcher doesn't care to look. When dates and places of Christian acrocities are cited, Christians don't recognize the history of the Christianity itself.

"I can't view reality/evidence" is long in-grained in the Christian pyche, whether it not Vatican sciencists not looking-through Galileo's telescope to see evidence for a helio-centric universe or Sells not recognizing alternative first century scriptures - denying the Dead Sea Scrolls - the head in the sand response remains consistent across the centuries.

Whether it is ancient opposition to "gnosis", Medieval suppression of individual throught or actions more modern paradigms of knowledge; One thing is certain: The Christian Master's of the Allusion, don't want Ms & Mr Public knowing too much. Nor are there allowed secular
interpretions. All knowledge, if Christians were to have there way, would, as in days of old, be mediated/censored/controlled by Clerics.

Daviy

You’ve chosen your counter-examples very poorly indeed. Your first mistake was choosing the KJV for your text. Unfortunately the KJV is generally not a very good translation. In verse 21 ‘Entos humoon estiv’ is better translated ‘in the midst of you(pl)’ than ‘within you’. This, of course, makes far more sense in the context as it is somewhat nonsensical to suggest that such an obviously social and political metaphor as ‘kingdom’ should describe an ‘inner process’. The change required of individuals to bring about the Kingdom is not private religious enlightenment directed at personal salvation but external, social action (like healing the sick, releasing the prisoner and touching the leper) directed at social and political change. Why do you think the Romans executed Jesus? He wasn’t peddling easy religious pap.

This text provides an excellent example of how subtly translation choices can reflect the views of the translator rather than the original meaning.

Daviy, given that your knowledge of Greek is obviously limited and your skills in literary criticism are non-existent you had best stick with the RSV as your closest approximation to the original Greek. It’s not perfect but it’s about as good as you’ll get .

Nonetheless you have illustrated the way some Churches (The Anglican Church in this case) have corrupted the Gospel to suit their own ends. Any Church that participates in the exercise of State power is bound to gloss over the politically subversive nature of the Gospel in favour of a benign, ‘internalized’ version of it. Selling this emasculated and depoliticized version of the Gospel to the uneducated and the illiterate is one of the ways that the Church has manipulated and oppressed people over the centuries.