Boaz,

I'd have to agree with Wizofaus. It may take a few hundred years, but unless our scientific discoveries do a complete 180° turn (which looks more and more unlikely everyday), then yes, eventually the monotheistic God will join the dusty bookshelves along with Thor, Zeus and Apollo.

This also sounds like a good time to remind you of a quote that is so very true; Which I'm sure you've heard before, but it bears repeating:

“Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” - Steven Weinburg.

With the conflict that religion aids and causes, it's certainly not the answer to anything much at all.

I know what you're thinking: “But if every one found the REAL God then there wouldn't be much conflict.”

No. We'd be stuck in the middle-ages with little technology, still burning people at the stake for things like adultery and blasphemy.

And the excuse that we would have eventually learned to interpret the Bible “correctly” by following Jesus' teachings, does little more than punch a massive hole in the theory that morality is dependent on the Bible.

There had to be another influence of some sort working to help us to know how to interpret the Bible in a more civil way, and cherry-pick the good bits. Because it certainly wasn't the Bible that gave us this ability, considering the horrors and atrocities of the Old Testament God.

And yes, I know what you're thinking here too: “It's Jesus and the Holy Spirit that help us to know how to interpret the Bible correctly.”

No, not necessarily at all.

There are plenty of visible signs, in all species, that demonstrate that our ability to know what parts of the Bible are the good bits, comes from an evolutionary survival mechanism called "morality".

So yeah... What was I saying again? Oh, that's right... I agree entirely with Wizofaus and I certainly don't think religion is an answer.

I would of thought that it is obvious that when people deny truth that they easily swallow a lie. The belief system of the secular humanist in the name of science (not real science of course) holds as many if not more dogmas than many religions. Those who believe that belief in Christ will die out are dreaming. If throwing men into pots of oil, torturing and thrown men in prison who had seen the risen Lord was not enough to kill truth then nothing will. The church of Jesus Christ is in a healthy state and their are now more believers then ever before. The hopeless flaws that have led to untold misery by the secular humanist dogmas only assist His church in growing.

From the opening premise of this debate the atheists felt that injustice was being carried out by not imposing steeper penalties or fines upon guilty persons. Of course this was done by one with a personal agenda to stop all animal slaughter. They were blaming the Church for giving lenient sentences. Their bigoted and unbalanced bias against Christians is now showing. They have an agenda against the Church and its members - it would be the same agenda as was demonstrated in atheist China and the former USSR. The religious and Christians especially are the blight and scum of humanity, they must be eradicated.

Yet they turn around and accuse Christians of injustice done in the name of Christ. Are the Christians today more humane by not imposing heavy penalties [including death] on the guilty, or are they still burning witches at the stake? It is obvious that atheists would put to death murderers, rapists etc, that Christians give opportunity to repent.

Yet atheists still make the claim they are more humane than Christians. Why? Because they are not imposing heavy penalties at Court. What are the facts? Do atheists want heavier penalties including longer prison terms and death or are they using double speak? Can the atheists here start speaking balanced justice or are they going to demonstrate the same sort of double speaks and bigotry in Courts

Runner, there may be more believers than ever before, but there are also vastly more unbelievers than ever before too.
Either way, the total percentage of humans that have ever existed who believed in your particular God is small and decreasing.

Runner,

<<I would of thought that it is obvious that when people deny truth that they easily swallow a lie.>>

Damn Strait!

<<The belief system of the secular humanist in the name of science (not real science of course) holds as many if not more dogmas than many religions.>>

Atheism is not a belief system. It’s the lack of a set belief system, and independent thought based on rational thinking. So your point here is irrelevant.

<<If throwing men into pots of oil, torturing and thrown men in prison who had seen the risen Lord was not enough to kill truth then nothing will.>>

Common sense, rationality, the advancement of civilization and scientific discoveries are far more effective than you’re medieval way of thinking.

<<The church of Jesus Christ is in a healthy state and their are now more believers then ever before.>>

Percentages, runner, percentages.

<<The hopeless flaws that have led to untold misery by the secular humanist dogmas only assist His church in growing.>>

As opposed to the large-scale misery caused by religious wars and terrorism throughout history?

Philo,

<<From the opening premise of this debate the atheists felt that injustice was being carried out by not imposing steeper penalties or fines upon guilty persons.>>

No. The opening premise was more that criminals shouldn’t be able to get off lightly because of religion.

<<They have an agenda against the Church and its members…>>

Now you’re just making things up again.

<<…it would be the same agenda as was demonstrated in atheist China and the former USSR.>>

…and again.

<<The religious and Christians especially are the blight and scum of humanity, they must be eradicated. >>

…and again.

<<Yet they turn around and accuse Christians of injustice done in the name of Christ.>>

Not all Christians. But yes, there certainly are some Christians who do commit injustices in the name of Christ.

China and the Soviet Union never did what they did (or do what they do) ‘in the name of’ Atheism, it’s done to suppress the people. There’s a big difference.

Obviously the Steve Weinberg quote I mentioned before goes strait over your head.

<<Are the Christians today more humane by not imposing heavy penalties [including death] on the guilty, or are they still burning witches at the stake?>>

Yes. But not so much in the US though, unfortunately.

<<It is obvious that atheists would put to death murderers, rapists etc, that Christians give opportunity to repent.>>

And here you are making things up again.

<<Yet atheists still make the claim they are more humane than Christians.>>

…and again

<<Why? Because they are not imposing heavy penalties at Court.>>

…and again.

<<What are the facts? Do atheists want heavier penalties including longer prison terms and death or are they using double speak?>>

And again, Atheists are independent thinkers. Atheism is not a belief system. So you can’t speculate about ‘what Atheists want’ in this respect.

<<Can the atheists here start speaking balanced justice…>>

They already have been.

Thank you both Runner and Philo, for making clear, the subtle point I was trying to make previously about rational thinking and the lack there of.