I don't know how to interpret "A Christian, in the truest meaning of the word…" to mean anything besides whatever you personally think it means. I don’t have a real problem with that (I don't care) but you are assuming you are correct. Experience has taught us that most (many) Christians think otherwise too. To me though, this means any Christian who takes the bible verbatim, as the word of god, no questions asked. This is a dictate promoted by Christendom for centuries; I don't know how to recant that view just because it is inconvenient in a modern world???

Sorry, I will get back to you tomorrow David; my Mother was admitted to the ER today (possible renal failure, bummer that) and I need to get some rest … tomorrow is going to be tiring to say the least.

David, I don’t care what someone else wants to believe in because I have no control over their thoughts and it is their right. My problem is with organizations that preach to the rest of the world that the reason we have strife in it is just because the rest of the world will not unquestionably capitulate to whatever they want to believe in (in its entirety), and that their own Church masters’ are the only people ‘qualified’ to speak god’s mind for him (in his absence) and that no other belief system is possible because they (of course) are all based on the wrong magic. I have tried to tell religious folk that their battle is with the misbelievers who promote their own infallible everything, not those who think of all magic in the same light, equally, disbelievingly. But all the church masters know that all the gods and all their miracles are based on the same (if worded slightly differently) irrational foundation and are equally untenable … and they all count on this concept to promote their own unquestionable business. When you talk about the ‘truest’ meaning of the word of god, you are really saying ‘in your opinion’ which of course isn’t my opinion too and I am under no obligation to accept or run with them … it is just magic to me is all. BS is still BS no matter how candy coated it it??? Lenin has nothing to do with the ‘god’ debate and I am no more interested in his irrationality than that of any other human misfit we have been cursed to have to live through. Every revolution in history was the result of someone’s idea of personal gain or because of a fracture between the rule makers (be they religious or secular) and the people who are always the ones to suffer the most. There is nothing unnatural about human failings just because we are all humans and we are all stranded on planet earth and have no options other than to exist governed by universal constraints at all times. Other than magicians and gullible people, magic has no place in the real modern world, practically speaking. I at least congratulate you on your ability to separate your spirituality from the main stream religious organizations who insist on doing your thinking for you, are the only ones qualified to interpret gods mind and who demand absolute authority over their flock (and everyone else in or out of this world) just because they know best and are (but of course) incorruptible themselves.

You talk often of human corruption and you even apply it to the church masters … but you don’t seem to apply it to the unknowns who compiled, corrected, translated, modified (to broach reality)scripture and then announce that this document contains only the infallible word of their god. If there was a period in our history when humans were perfect, it surely wouldn’t have been in the first (+/-) century where brutality, ignorance and superstitions ruled the day. A time when all the players involved were illiterate shepherds and fishermen (and carpenters) who to a man believed in blood sacrifices and burning witches (in America as little as 250 years ago). None of god’s creations seem to be perfect from the haughty angels to the live forever human called Adam. For all those who think they are going to heaven, I would point out that all Adam did was eat some fruit that Eve gave him: and that act so offended this benevolent loving god so much, that he stripped Adam of all his rights and condemned all of mankind forever more because of this egregious act. Lucifer and Adam were perfect designs of this god and they failed miserably. What chance does a modern materialistic and frail fallible human have of getting there ... or of staying there???

What I would like to discuss with you though is why Jesus and why the Christian bible? I have my thoughts on this but I don’t want to presume anything and would hear you thoughts on the matter first.

PS – Mother is doing a lot better; her kidneys are starting to function so it appears that they caught this in time to prevent complete renal failure. At least for now anyway, dialysis in not in the immediate future.

PSS - This is the actual problem IMO: Faith – the ability to pretend knowing things that you don’t know.

Glad your mother is doing better, GFTess.

That's it, now you've got it.  Nobody can get to heaven at all.  That's why Christianity is the only religion that makes sense - it's the only one that says, "You can't do it."  All the other religions say, "You need to do such and such to go to the good place."  Christianity says, "This is the standard you need to live by.  But you can't do it."

That's why Jesus, the savior, had to come to Earth - to pay the penalty for what we have done wrong.  The penalty that God, in his justice, must apply to all who have sinned, which is all.  Except Jesus.  But Jesus says, I'll take that penalty for you, if you'll let me.   Jesus takes the penalty, and we are left looking, to God, like... Jesus.  The Sinless One.  So we can get to heaven with God.  That is the only way.  Don't let anyone tell you that doing good will get you there, GFTess, because they're a liar.  The worst kind of liar.

Think how it works in the court system.  If someone is given a fine to pay, they must pay that fine.  That's justice.  But if someone pays the fine for them... then they can go free.  Same thing here.

God is just, but God is so merciful, too, that he sent His perfect, sinless Son to die on the cross to take that death penalty off of us and onto himself.  But it only works for you if you accept it.  And the most grievious sin you can commit against God, is to have let His Son die in vain... so should you not accept Him, you are judged according to all you have done instead.

At least, if you believe what the Bible actually says, instead of what people say the Bible says.

Half the reason you can't believe anyone could believe in the 'mumbo jumbo' 'magic' of the Bible is because you don't know what it actually says.  If there IS a God, this is the God I would want there to be.  A God that doesn't leave the answer in my frail, human hands, but in His own hands... he took care of getting me to heaven, I don't have to do anything more than accept the gift.

If you think that all sounds way too easy, you're right.  It is way too easy.  But that's also part of God being God - He went out of His way to make it easy for us.  There is no huge barrier keeping people out of Heaven - it is only themselves that do it.  And He is not going to take those who don't want to be with Him. 

You keep talking about God being a license to do anything and church masters having authority to speak for Him, but only the Bible has authority to speak for Him.  My view is, since I know there is a God, and I know He's THIS powerful, I don't believe that God would let humans ruin his Word that He inspired to be written for our benefit.  He's big enough to keep that from happening.  So the written Word of God that I have is actually what God wanted to tell me.  Or else, it would not exist.

Through all the times that people have tried to stamp out the Bible, I think if it were not a special book protected by God it wouldn't exist, just as Israel would no longer exist unless they were a protected and sacred people group to God.

A Christian, in the truest sense of the word, is someone who has accepted the gift of Jesus Christ taking the death penalty of our sin away from us.  That is the only definition of a Christian.

Yeah, well, God DOES forget.  On purpose.  Pretty neat!

Anyway, that's the gospel.  That's the thing that people have died for for ~2000 years now.  I would, if I were you, consider it much more closely than you appear to, because it's a big deal.  The Bible isn't about a code of ethics or a way to live - it includes that, but that's not what it's about.

Faith: Pretending to know things you don't know" by Dr. Peter Boghossianhttp   http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=qp4WUFXvCFQ&NR=1

Faith is the ability to pretend knowing things you don’t know!!! Like evolution and cosmology for example.

PS - there is more than one computer in the world.

I don't 'need' a robe wearing etc.  Why do you need a lab-coat wearing scientist to tell you about evolution, or even about why creation doesn't work?

Because, instead of doing it ourselves, we have others, even PAY others, to do the study for us so we can live our lives.  So I pay my pastor to study God's word full-time (as opposed to my part-time study, which is necessary!) and you listen to your lab-coat wearing scientists tell you about the way the world works.  How is it any different?

Also, I'm still waiting for this factual information that disavows the Bible.

Tess, here's what you do with the Bible.  You read page 1.  It says something, you decide it means 'this'.  Then, you read page two, and you decide it means 'that', which conflicts with what you thought it said on page 1.  So you decide it's contradictory of itself, instead of critically thinking about it to figure out if there is a third interpretation which fits with what the Bible actually says as opposed to what you decided it means.  If there IS a way for them both to be true, that is probably what the Bible meant.  If there ISN'T, then it's contradictory.  But you don't bother with trying to reconcile them.  That's all I meant by properly interpretting - you don't need a degree or a robe to do it in most cases.  There are some things that are harder to understand than others, of course.

Also, you continue to talk about how you can't offer anything as proof, and then you don't offer anything.  The exception being videos I've already expressed that I cannot watch.  Perhaps another medium, like written word?

You say you want to talk about evolution, but when I bring up anything about it, you tell me I don't know anything about evolution - then don't explain how I'm wrong - and then you tell me I don't know what an atheist is.  Why aren't you at all forthcoming with some sort of explanation to tell me why I'm wrong about my ideas of what evolution is?  If we're talking about something different, why do you keep attacking ME as a person instead of clarifying what your point is and how it is supported, and how what I'm saying isn't relevant?

Hi GFT...glad your mom is doing better too.

My point about human corruption was primarily just to state that human beings do fail and fall and religion isn't a necessity of or the cause for that.

The point about the writers of the bible being fallible and subject to the same weaknesses is an excellent one.  I had the same concerns myself--even after being a Christian for some time.  It took some extraordinary circumstances for me to get a personal understanding there.

As to why I decided that "Jesus is the Way"--that requires a personal testimony--which is interestingly what the bible itself says is the only thing we have to offer the world regarding why we believe.  What you're really saying is, "Share your testimony" when you ask me about that.  I get that a lot but the fact is, most debaters actually don't want to hear that no matter what they say.  

Let me give it some thought and I may post an account of it in a separate thread or on my own site.  I'll want to mull it over some first.  That isn't something I flippantly throw out as a conversation piece--especially in a public venue of strangers with no real interest other than derisive inquiry.

Without explaining things but in way of some explanation:  the bible is given for the same reason you have someone take a message rather than tell you from memory what someone else said...or for the same reason a detective interviews multiple, prospective witnesses at the scene of the crime in order to assemble comparative notes that lead to clues through there details and similarities.

If the bible had been assembled "at a go" by a single person like Mary baker Eddie's "Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures", "The Urantia Book", "The Book of Mormon" or the Quran I'd be more questioning of any trustworthiness of it.  What makes the bible interesting is that it is a thread of continuous thought that spans centuries and multiple societies and that no single portion of it is complete without the other portions.  That's a huge discussion in and of itself and I don't think I can do the research for it becasue it starts with ancient Jewish history and works to the present covering several academic areas.

Here's the simple solution:  the bible (as in the Old and New Testaments) presents Jesus along with a set of conditions required to personally discover him.  If someone follows those conditions or has experiences in life that intuitively lead them to follow them and then has an encounter that plainly says, "Jesus" to them...well that sort of gives credibility to the bible as a whole to that person from that point forward.

It's a bit like the Matrix: "Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is.  You have to see it for yourself.".

An encounter with Jesus isn't conditioned thinking or a religious meme stereotyped into a society (though these things exist).  It's an actual experience.

Most people ask, "What's your experience?"--few actually want to hear it.  Pearls and swine.