You keep using the word "religion", whose existence you have refused. I think "refuse" may be a more acceptable word than "deny", certainly less harsh, but the underlying logic still stands.
There you go, stating something that is completely contrary to the evidence above. Why do you think that I have refused the existence of religion? Wasn't it I who brought to light the fact that Atheism is a religion? Wasn't it I who showed how it is a religion by comparing it to the dictionary definition of the word "religion?" What are you saying about yourself when you can't even follow the written pattern?
Yes. and with that assertion you have eroded your own faith. If disbeluef is a belief, and atheism is a religion, then the concepts of belief, faith and religion are meaningless. What use is a concept or an idea if you can't define or even imagine its negation?
And the implied assumtion, was the one of monotheism, at length discussed above. A polytheist could take your assumption and still remain religious, as a monotheist which you are, you can't.
No
Quite the contrary. My faith is stronger than ever, because I have been pushed into examining the evidences for my faith ever more strongly because of things written in this forum.
Set aside the ideas of belief and faith for a moment. Rather, look at only the evidences for the various religions including Atheism. The monotheistic view is strongest. The reason that it is strongest is, the Bible cannot exist according to probability, yet it does exist, in great numbers, in multitudes of translations. You can determining the odds of its existence by examining the way it came into existence along with the things that make it up, along with the traditions of the Hebrew people that it is truth. None of any of the other religions - not even atheism - can match the religion of the Bible in this way.
Whatever assumption(s) you are talking about above, let's continue making them. Why would I suggest this? Because the more there is an assumption, the more there has to be faith to believe in it. And the only way God accepts us is through faith. Let's hope any Atheists will suddenly make the jump to faith in God - for Whom there is way more evidence than no God - taking the strength of their faith with them.
I find it hard to believe that you have actually questioned your beliefs, BADecker.
We are still no closer to answering the problem of the criterion as you can see with your discussion with The Joint.
And also, you do not have the context enough to understand that Nicea was not a distillation of authentic faith.
I have discussed how Paul was never a follower of Christ, so by which criteria do you judge Paul's teaching to be correct?
Please at least read these sources to get some context:
Sources Section and section on messianic movements
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Temple_JudaismLook BADecker, by careful study of the Problem of the criterion, you too can put into context such discoveries of science as "all is information and energy" and "spiritual essence is never born, so it can never die". Knowing the secret to immortality and energy/information is the theme of spirituality, concepts like "salvation" have little support, but we can always share the world of love, so it is the "altered ego" which desires to be saved by love. After all, you cannot share an experience, so all of these reasons make salvation unlikely unless it is by one's own efforts.
God is love and no one is left out of universal love.
I made use of some sources: "The Crystal Cave" and the three other lectures from "Deepak Chopra: The Essential DVD Collection" (1995) and" of course Phoenix Journals which are very explicit and well - referenced; making them superior to the Nicean and Pauline teachings. The Bible simply never says "Jesus is God" and you can see this fact on the Wikipedia page for "Christ".
I hope that you can see why both I and The Joint are Discussing with you the Problem of the Criterion and related issues.
Does this then mean that you are accepting as your own, the same basic reasons as I, why one might want to examine what religion and God are in the first place? I still haven't been able to get out of you a simple, itemized list as to why anyone might want to look at the writings you profess.
A simple itemized list might look like the one below. Now, don't get me wrong. This is only an example to guide you in writing your list. I am not at all saying that this is what your list is or would be if you wrote it down. This is only a little example showing how you might write your list, so we all can see clearly a little bit about what you and your writings are there for.
A list of the potential benefits from reading my stuff:
1. Offers a method to get rich;
2. Offers a method to see the universe by flying around the universe in a spaceship;
3. Gives me three wishes like Aladdin's lamp;
4. Shows me how to get rid of any disease I might have;
5. Gives me profound wisdom and understanding so I can outsmart all my neighbors.
Now, of course, some (if not all) of the 5 items I listed above, might be a little silly. Or maybe not, considering that you haven't given a simple list yet... at least not that I have seen, anyway. But perhaps you would kindly list, say, two of the best benefits one might get for reading your stuff (not even 5, like I listed above), so that I and others at least have a little incentive to do the reading (not that we would, necessarily, but...).
What do you think? Can you do this little thing for all of us?
Thanks. You are a sweetheart for doing so.
