Trav,

1. “Firstly, it's absurd to claim that most Christians think they ‘can't be wrong’.” (Trav)

"I think he's got it... the rain in Spain..."

That is the point eactly. You are now saying that Christians maybe wrong about the existence of their god. Your local cleric could be wrong. Herein, you side with Dawkins on the issue of fallibility. Pedantically, and Dawkins is being deliberately pedantic. Theism and atheism are two unreasonable sides of the same coin.

2. Debate:

We are engaging in dialogue. Read Socrates or Hegel.

3. Sam Harris. Sam who?

I had never heard of Harris until yesterday. Based on your comment, he is a fallible Christian too. Harris doesn’t know with certainty god exists. He preaches a possibility. That deserves repeating... Harris preaches a possibility.

-again-“ … it's absurd to claim that most Christians think they "can't be wrong". (Trav) Therefore, it is absurd to say that Harris must be right. … Good. We are making progress.

Research. Sampling can be a very exacting science or very slap-dash. Regarding the former, researchers, who factor analyse scales and measure validity and reliability, generally report the values of their tests. Where are the data to justify “beyond reasonable doubt”? What is his

4. There is a big gap between believing that there are only “white swans” and knowing there are only “white swans”. I assume you know of this illustration from Philosophy.

5. I may have teased out a response already: The Pope, your local minister and “Christians” are fallible in their beliefs. Even Sells!

6. You have cut and pasted skilfully. In actuality, I implied based on your desire to distance yourself from Christian history, you were better to define yourself in context with your local congregation, who are not mass murders, unlike the historical Christians.

Sells,

Any comment on the Eschaton? What about the revisionist take (above)? Or is Christianity best to align itself with the Jewish atonement?


O.

waterboy,

Churches allow their members to experience a performance and have orthodox ideas reinforced. The Christian Churches seem to want their believers to see clerics, as agents of God and therefore somehow closer to their God. Stratch Sells and underneath there is a Vicar of Christ.

i don't know what stratching sells means, but it sounds like fun. may i try?

Hello bushbasher,

Not as funny (or embarrassing) as the time I left the "l" public in "public affairs award" on a CV. I was unaware until it was pointed out at the interview. One panelist said he was "jealous".

I modified a borrowed metaphor, "if you scratch a Russian you will find a Tartar", meaning Russians have a Caucasion body and a Mongolian soul:

Herein, Sells, if one scratched beneath the Protestant surface methinks we find a Catholic soul. e.g., infalibility, doctrine & creed, top-down minstering, conventional orthodoxy over liberalism.

I am not a typist on any level.

Trav,

You now understand.

Good.

You are a member of a non-murderous congregation, who do not act like historical Christians. Moreover, Christians are fallible and by extension your ministers merely preach a possibly

You're a laugh Oliver. Sorry, haven't had a chance to reply yet, been too busy. Plus, there's other discussions on OLO that are more interesting.

For now, I suggest you do some more research on Sam Harris. He's an atheist. Here's Vox Day from two weeks ago, referring to a study done by Harris which polled Christians and atheists level of agreement with the statement that "The widespread belief in a personal God suggests that God actually exists":

"Interestingly enough, I have found that for some reason atheist science fetishists don't seem to enjoy me doubting and questioning THEIR faith either. For, as Sam Harris has shown, it is atheists who tend to assert their beliefs far more rigidly and dogmatically than Christians. One wonders if atheists would be similarly inclined to answer this particular question the same way if it concerned anything but God - note that the key term which clearly highlights the atheist tendency towards mindless dogmatism is the word "suggest". The only rationally correct answer is "agree", which can be easily understood by substituting anything from "cancer" to "bull market" for "God"; regardless, contrary to the New Atheist propaganda, the scientific evidence shows that it is Christians who are the more open-minded."

Oh, and you seem to be getting clearer now: You are attempting to show that everyone preaches a "possibility" and that no one can really know the truth, regardless of who they are- be they atheist, Christian or other. Is that the point you're actually trying to make here?

oliver, i was pretty sure i knew what you intended. but i was hoping "stratching" was real: it sounded so appropriate for sellick.

trav:

"For, as Sam Harris has shown, it is atheists who tend to assert their beliefs far more rigidly and dogmatically than Christians."

that is the second time you have said something like this. i request, again, the link to exactly what harris is claiming.

and, though of course you are under no obligation to answer my questions, i'll repeat: is your belief in your christian god challengeable, and if so, how?