tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post4183956616512513355..comments2024-03-25T17:35:02.238-04:00Comments on Debunking Christianity: Why Does Christianity Flourish?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-3950381918218579682008-03-13T18:29:00.000-04:002008-03-13T18:29:00.000-04:00Islam flourishes (although I'm not sure flourish i...Islam flourishes (although I'm not sure flourish is the correct word) because in most of the Muslim world apostates are either ostracised or executed. The Koran is quire explicit about this. (Just like Xtianity used to do and still does if you happen to work in certain medical areas). <BR/><BR/>In the UK Muslim apostates http://www.ex-muslim.org.uk/ are very bravely trying to do something about this. <BR/><BR/>However slamming planes into buildings has helped raise the consciousness of the world to realise that religionists are not the benign beings that they would like us to think they are (I include all god botherers in this because the ‘nice’ ones just help legitimise the more extreme versions of this delusion). I exclude Buddhists because they don’t have a god but do have some nutty beliefs about reincarnation. However they are probably the least likely of all religions to kill you if you do not believe what they believe. They may kill themselves in protest at civil issue though usually by self-immolation.<BR/><BR/>It is not just Muslims who do this though remember Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma and historically xtians have been much much worse than muslims ever were. The total irony of this are all these people are arguing over something that never existed http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/1000years.htm<BR/>It is like arguing over who is the best wizard Merlin or Harry Potter.Pyricvhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13049600907981790204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-49897540646590538632007-10-17T10:01:00.000-04:002007-10-17T10:01:00.000-04:00Oh you could easily claim atheists were in denial ...Oh you could easily claim atheists were in denial if the existence of God were strongly in evidence. It's not. Would you be in denial about the teapot orbiting Mars, or would I be delusional for insisting it exists without evidence?<BR/><BR/><I>And what do you do with delusional people, and child abusers?<BR/><BR/>Well, in many places they are locked up.</I><BR/><BR/>In civilized society, we only lock up the delusional if they are a danger to themselves and others. And I think we should do the same with people with religious delusions who are a danger to themselves and others--if your child isn't eating his supper, is there a real difference between telling him that God is going to torture him eternally for not honoring his father and mother, and telling him that the boogieman is going to dismember him for being naughty?<BR/><BR/><I>The danger I see here of labeling Christianity as some kind of disorder...and I am seeing blatant instances of this as over at the "Rational" Responers...is that he seems to similar to what the Dialectical Materialists did with both believers and dissidents.</I><BR/><BR/>First of all, call them Communists; they are the subset of Dialectical Materialists that did the atrocities you mention. Second, Christianity is not in any danger of being labeled a mental disorder, which you know damn well. You guys are by far in the majority. We can't even get an open atheist into the Senate; you really think we can lock up all Christians?<BR/><BR/>I do think that this is a fair pushback against the idea that "faith" is a virtue. Whose stupid idea was it that believing in something with admittedly insufficient evidence is a <B>good</B> thing!?! And yet I constantly hear that we are a great nation because of our faith, and so-and-so is a great man because of his faith.<BR/><BR/><I>After all, if one group can be labeled this way, so can others.</I><BR/><BR/>Yeah, the people who talk to aliens make this argument all the time. Why won't you get off their back!?!Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-84271541969498241992007-10-17T07:35:00.000-04:002007-10-17T07:35:00.000-04:00Richard, if you are a psychiatrist you are of cour...Richard, if you are a psychiatrist you are of course aware of the way psychiatry has been abused in the past century.<BR/><BR/>Especially with the availability of more and more powerful drugs.<BR/><BR/>The danger I see here of labeling Christianity as some kind of disorder...and I am seeing blatant instances of this as over at the "Rational" Responers...is that he seems to similar to what the Dialectical Materialists did with both believers and dissidents.<BR/><BR/>After all, if one group can be labeled this way, so can others.<BR/><BR/>More blatantly, we see Dawkins calling Christians delusional and Dennet calling them child abusers.<BR/><BR/>And what do you do with delusional people, and child abusers?<BR/><BR/>Well, in many places they are locked up.<BR/><BR/>Taking a different approach, perhaps atheists are simply in DENIAL.Emanuel Goldsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02653303041185240250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-56326186605423383152007-10-16T17:40:00.000-04:002007-10-16T17:40:00.000-04:00Hi. I’m new here, but I follow this site and have...Hi. I’m new here, but I follow this site and have a few thoughts about this topic that I haven’t seen brought up yet. I am an atheist-leaning agnostic, a former fundamentalist, and a psychiatrist, so I hope I can bring that perspective to this discussion.<BR/><BR/>What I suggest as part of the reason for the flourishing of Christianity is apologetics – but not the “conscious”, logical sort of apologetics debated on this site, but rather a more “implicit” sort, more emotional and rhetorical (in the sense of classical rhetoric), that otherwise uncritical prospective believers come across.<BR/><BR/>I recently wrote my deconversion story and, as part of that process, went back and looked at some of the apologetics that I used to find convincing. What an interesting exercise! It is fascinating to re-examine these things, now that I am a much more critical reader, and note the assertions and bad arguments I used to accept.<BR/><BR/>Most significant for me was CS Lewis (like many people), especially his Mere Christianity and The Problem of Pain. Here’s what I noticed:<BR/><BR/>It is quite noteworthy, I think, that Lewis does not begin with philosophical or evidential arguments about God or the Christian Bible. He instead argues from the basic human experience of guilt. He asks his readers to consider all of the times they have acted, or thought, selfishly, or done something they knew was wrong. This is a master rhetorical move, because it gets his readers into a state of affective arousal (we are social creatures, and all experience guilt), which makes them less critical. And then he pulls a bit of slight-of-hand, which it goes without saying I did not notice at the time. <BR/><BR/>(a) He defines “sin” extraordinarily broadly, encompassing anytime we have any bit of self interest in our actions (for example, if we take any pleasure in having done something good – i.e., the fact that *I* did something good – rather than pure egoless pleasure in the fact that *good was done*, that’s sin), as well as any “primitive” emotions, such as jealously (which implies selfishness) or irrational anger (“If you are angry with your brother…”). Since human beings cannot control what they feel, then obviously, by this definition, we are all sinners.<BR/>(b) He suggests that these experiences of shame and guilt are the truest and most accurate intuitions we have, so we should heed them. They imply what kind of creature we are. There is no irrational or misplaced guilt, for Lewis.<BR/>(c) He suggests that this is only the tip of the iceberg, that we are actually much, much worse than we realize. He does not even bother to argue this. He simply states, in Problem of Pain, that once we *feel* how bad we have acted, that something about us is really awful and unforgivable, then we will begin to see how pervasively wicked we really are.<BR/><BR/>Lewis then makes another Christian assertion, which is common (not unique to Lewis) but is almost never argued: that God cannot tolerate sin. Yet this seems curious and at least would seem to require an argument. Why not? Isn’t he God? Doesn’t he tolerate our “corruption” already, while we are alive? Why does he stop after 80 or so years? Lewis does make a somewhat oblique argument for it, when he suggests that “real” love, such as God has for us, “demands the perfection of the beloved.” Love that does not wish its object to be perfect is disinterested, and therefore not real love, according to Lewis. Yet this, too, seems curious, and is inconsistent with human relationships: we wish those we care for to be the best they can be, yet accept their foibles nonetheless, indefinitely. We even laugh about them. Its what makes us interesting! But Lewis’ readers are not likely to notice this. Now that they are convinced how utterly corrupt they “really” are, being told they are loved fiercely by God (Lewis has a stirring passage describing this) is likely to engender even more guilt and a sense of undeservedness.<BR/><BR/>Taken together, if Lewis is effective (and his popularity suggests he is very effective) then it is likely because, it can be argued, he gets his readers into emotional arousal, taps into bad feelings they have about themselves, and then convinces them that they are much worse than they think and God will not tolerate even minor imperfections.<BR/><BR/>What out does a reader have at this point but accept the cure that Lewis offers?<BR/><BR/>I think some psychology can shed some light on this process. Most schools of thought within psychology, though they differ on the details, agree that self-esteem is a learned phenomenon. We are not born knowing how to feel okay about ourselves, and feeling that we have worth. But anything that is learned, can be learned well or it can be learned poorly. Self esteem can be spotty, uneven, even in healthy people, and can be lower during times of difficulty in our lives.<BR/><BR/>Moreover, modern psychology suggests that the emotional life of young children is much different than the emotional life of adults. Consider when you are angry, as an adult, at someone you love. You may be very, very angry, spittin’ angry in fact, but somewhere, deep down, you still know (and could say, if pressed), that this person is still the same person they were, the same person you love, and still has good qualities, despite your being so angry. This sense is what children probably lack. Their emotions have a global, totalizing quality. When they are mad, that anger is, for the moment, all they know and all they have ever known. It colors their whole experiential world.<BR/><BR/>The reason is that the ability to discriminate emotions from self is also a learned behavior. In older analytic terms, it is an ego function. It takes brain maturation and good parenting to learn that what you feel at the moment is not all of who you are; feelings are part of the self but not identical with it. Thus, the upshot is that, for a young child, there is no or little difference between *feeling bad* and *being bad.*<BR/><BR/>The point here is that we all carry within us a residual sense of “inner badness” that most of us eventually learn to master, but during periods of stress and emotional upheaval, can be reactivated. Christianity has a keen sense for human frailty, and well-honed methods for rooting out any sense of imperfection we already harbor.<BR/><BR/>Lewis taps into these feelings. This sense of inner badness and (potentially) low self-esteem is ubiquitous in our development and so Lewis, in activating these feelings, presents what is essentially an emotional argument that serves as both an amplification of bad feelings, low self worth, and a solution to them.<BR/><BR/>And if we feel overwhelmingly that we are bad, worthless, and unable to help or improve ourselves, well then what option to de have except to accept the “rescue” of a larger-than-life figure such as Jesus?<BR/><BR/>My proposed solution to this focuses much more on emotional health than on the more cognitive arguments that many atheists gravitate toward. We should be teaching our children – perhaps in schools? – how to deal with their emotions. How do you recognize when you are upset, or hurting? How do you seek support when you need it? How do you ask for and get what you need from others, effectively? How do you make, and keep, friends? How do you make yourself feel good about yourself? What do you do when you get mad, or sad, or lonely, or upset? How do you “regulate” emotions, as psychotherapists say? These are skills that many of us learn, imperfectly, as part of growing up, from watching others and trial-and-error, but they can also be taught explicitly. I think we can make people much more resistant to Christianity or any other form of ideological indoctrination, not only by making them more adept at critical thinking, but more adept at managing their emotional lives. We can impede Christianity by getting people to need it less.<BR/><BR/>So, my basic idea is this: critical thinking is extremely important. But it goes out the window when emotional needs are not being met. We need to teach people how to take care of themselves emotionally. Psychotherapists know how to do this. I’m not saying everyone needs therapy; these are skills that could be taught in a classroom.<BR/><BR/>I apologize for the length of this post, but this material is hard to summarize quickly.<BR/><BR/>I’m interested in hearing others thoughts!<BR/><BR/>Richard MRichard Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06071672526594753513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-56698469224824346012007-10-12T10:10:00.000-04:002007-10-12T10:10:00.000-04:00Thanks, prup, for tackling Raymond's points.Raymon...Thanks, prup, for tackling Raymond's points.<BR/><BR/>Raymond: Prup gave what would be my response to the first part of your reply: that many of these religions are stricter morally than Protestantism. (Take a look at Jainism, that definitely doesn't survive because it appeal's to the flesh.)<BR/><BR/>You seemed to miss the real question though. Stating that these religions exist because they deny Christianity is like saying "the only reason Christianity exists is because European's refused to honor Mohammed as a prophet." You'd consider that a partial explanation too, right?<BR/><BR/>Stating that Judaism is around because it's old isn't a particularly revealing answer either. All of the Sumerian, Akkadian, and Caananite religions are old now: but few have any modern practitioners.<BR/><BR/>The question isn't why they survived past their introduction to Christianity, but why - particularly the case of Islam - they have no trouble finding members ranging from the everyday believer to the passionate evangelical. And once you can answer that in a satisfactory manner, try applying that insight to Christianity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-14115651564955685292007-10-12T09:38:00.000-04:002007-10-12T09:38:00.000-04:00One other thing:Joseph, I note the general times y...One other thing:<BR/><BR/>Joseph, I note the general times you post -- do you sleep at night, buddy?Bloviatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17214282017266183128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-9097947934451902032007-10-12T09:37:00.000-04:002007-10-12T09:37:00.000-04:00On the original post as to why christianity floris...On the original post as to why christianity florishes, it must be noted that the hierarchical structures found in the original church correspond roughly with an anthropological imperative consistent with human existence -- we are, much like baboons and chimpanzees, socially structured animals. Why did gnosticism lose out to orthodox christianity? Why was the original catholic church (for over 1000 years) so successful in perpetuating the belief system versus a more informal "apostolic father" church as much fancied by fundamentalists? Simply put, the social structures that are inherent in human existence were strongly present. Note that it wasn't until Luther's time that any real backlash against oppressive church doctrine gained a foothold. Further, the Roman church used (to my mind, rather masterfully) existing pagan belief systems with abandon, in order to absorb and control competing theologies. How long would christianity have lasted if, like the gnostics, it was all about individual mystery knowledge and no real need to evangelize? How long would it have lasted had not the Roman church involved those nasty little pagan rituals. And of course, the icing on the cake: eternal life in exchange for simple submission to authority. Sounds like a deal to me.Bloviatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17214282017266183128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-72561457316518228382007-10-11T02:38:00.000-04:002007-10-11T02:38:00.000-04:00David said, "That's a powerful drug you take to cu...David said, "That's a powerful drug you take to cure your fear of death and it gives you suicidal tendencies."<BR/><BR/>You must be talking about the Bible, right?Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07058424176773515878noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-65165879549035705502007-10-11T02:35:00.000-04:002007-10-11T02:35:00.000-04:00caleb- you beat me to the punch. If, by "flourish...caleb- you beat me to the punch. If, by "flourishing", one means "increasing in membership rapidly", then Islam is flourishing. On the other hand, if by "flourishing" one means, as I suspect chris means, "believing in Christ", then chris is correct.<BR/><BR/>The Christian response to the question "why is Christianity flourishing?" here has been, basically, "because it's right". When asked why other religions are flourishing, the response is either "they're not" or "because they're wrong". Hmmm.zilchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01695741977946935771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-40669882948708049822007-10-11T00:19:00.000-04:002007-10-11T00:19:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Steven Bentlyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16139666223082953913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-48727787340310735472007-10-10T20:59:00.000-04:002007-10-10T20:59:00.000-04:00More high comedy from Raymond Isham:Lets take his ...More high comedy from Raymond Isham:<BR/>Lets take his comment to me. "One that may interest you just happened September 13, 2007. Four Christians were arrested for praying in a New York public park."<BR/><BR/>First, the arrest happened in June, not in September. That was merely when the ADF got involved in the battle -- as stated in the article you directed me to. Second, you fail to mention that the praying took place in the middle of a gay rights demonstration -- and it was in Elmira, New York, btw. Usually when New York is used alone, it implies NYC.<BR/>I am very curious as to the exact circumstances of the event -- as narrated by a more reliable source that Focus on the Family. Was the praying deliberately disruptive, and meant to be so, during a time when the Park had been given over to the organizers of the parade? (I doubt if you would complain at gays being arrested for interrupting a Chruch service.)<BR/>How can you claim this is 'silencing' them, even if all the facts favor your interpretation. At worst it was police overreaching their authority and arresting them for a misdemeanor of disturbing the peace. More likely it was police enforcing rules on crowd control -- I have little doubt that, had the demonstrators moved a couple of hundred feet they would have been allowed to pray all they wanted.<BR/><BR/>But your real high humor comes in your previous comment about other religions. Again, I quote:<BR/>"The reason that other religious organizations (ie Buddhism) have flourished is because those that are following these religious organizations are doing exactly what their flesh desires to do. They have a form of godliness but deny the power thereof (Romans 10:2; 2 Timothy 3:5). They are trying to please a diety with their actions, leaving them in charge of what they do."<BR/><BR/>Buddhists are not theists, to start with. As for other religions doing "exactly what their flesh desires to do" which religions. Muslims must pray five times every day, no matter what else they might prefer to be doing, and few people's flesh desires a whole month in which they must fast from sunrise to sunset -- a fast that includes even water. And the Muslim sexual code is as strict as the Christian one -- though both are 'honored more in the breaching.' (And they worship the same deity that Christians do, the same one that, supposedly, made the covenant with Abraham.)<BR/>Muslims must deny themselves pork and alcohol, hardly 'doing what they wish to do.'<BR/><BR/>In fact, except for sexual matters -- and teetotalism for some groups -- it is Protestantism that has the fewest restrictions on sensuality of any religion I can think of. No required fasts, no banned foods, no required time for prayer or required services -- even Catholics are theoretically required to attend Mass every Sunday.<BR/><BR/>Please keep commenting. I need good laughs.Prup (aka Jim Benton)https://www.blogger.com/profile/08376467128665482055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-84752319118443990282007-10-10T20:38:00.000-04:002007-10-10T20:38:00.000-04:00That's a powerful drug you take to cure your fear ...That's a powerful drug you take to cure your fear of death and it gives you suicidal tendencies.jakelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16445667772053665249noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-66740404975397887282007-10-10T16:34:00.000-04:002007-10-10T16:34:00.000-04:00Please, David, that should be obvious, given the e...Please, David, that should be obvious, given the expositions posted on the subject thus far in this comment section. Physical death is scarcely death at all to a genuine believer convinced of an eternity of bliss in heaven. True "death" to a Christian mind is the concept of spiritual death and/or eternity in hell.Calebhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17175173998016520555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-31112370720865459092007-10-10T16:26:00.000-04:002007-10-10T16:26:00.000-04:00If Christianity's appeal is centered on fear of de...If Christianity's appeal is centered on fear of death, why does the Gospel spread in areas where you are persecuted for your faith? Even to the point of death.jakelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16445667772053665249noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-26496717269513374882007-10-10T15:56:00.000-04:002007-10-10T15:56:00.000-04:00You don't hear a message, simply because you aren'...<I>You don't hear a message, simply because you aren't tuned into the frequency.</I><BR/><BR/>David Berkowitz couldn't have said it better.<BR/><BR/>(There's more than just sarcasm in my comment)Spirulahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14556681288241092875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-68472299599085232902007-10-10T15:50:00.000-04:002007-10-10T15:50:00.000-04:00John: This assumes the Christian faith is a delusi...John: <I>This assumes the Christian faith is a delusion...</I><BR/><BR/>Nice, John. Why do you bother to ask the question when right up front, you eliminate every possible answer but the one(s) you want to be true? Is this just more of your intellectual dishonesty bubbling to the surface?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07875159676599156539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-64001734633141558852007-10-10T15:32:00.000-04:002007-10-10T15:32:00.000-04:00Godless Geek - Its works are demonstrated at the g...<I>Godless Geek - Its works are demonstrated at the grass roots level, and are often obscured by the large shameful headlines generated by the faux Christians who seek their own glory via secular power structures.</I><BR/><BR/>Aye, no True Scotsman would ever do such a think.<BR/><BR/><I>The bible is available now in almost all languagues and in conformance with our commission, the good news is being spread throughout the inhabited earth.</I><BR/><BR/>As is <A HREF="www.timecube.com" REL="nofollow">Time Cube</A>; do you relegate your faith to the same status?<BR/><BR/><I>As to your 2nd question, you simply aren't open to it. I liken it to a radio frequency. Our brains act as receivers of messages, similar to the way radio's pick up radio waves. You don't hear a message, simply because you aren't tuned into the frequency.</I><BR/><BR/>Very convenient; you receive a revealed truth that I simply cannot. Why on Earth should I (or you) believe for a second that your revealed truth is genuine? It is clear that revealed truth is often a lie, or in error, so why should anyone, including you, have any certainty that your revealed truth (which cannot be verified) is correct?Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-36007848655379569402007-10-10T15:21:00.000-04:002007-10-10T15:21:00.000-04:00"I never felt moved by any of it."Mr. Geek - You h..."I never felt moved by any of it."<BR/><BR/>Mr. Geek - You have made my point.Chris Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13134785155889204025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-81764538007369766372007-10-10T14:52:00.000-04:002007-10-10T14:52:00.000-04:00you simply aren't open to it.I challenge you to re...<I>you simply aren't open to it.</I><BR/><BR/>I challenge you to read my post again. For the first 13 or 14 years of my life I believed unquestioningly and lived the religious life in its entirety, but even then, I never felt moved by any of it. I spent a great deal of time, even then, wondering what it was that all these people around me professed to feel, because I just wasn't getting it, and I really wanted to. My mind was wide open, waiting for the experience that never happened. It was exactly that which led to my next few years of living the life, but harboring thoughts in the back of my mind that maybe there really wasn't anything going on. It was actually a combination of psychology and western civilization classes in my first two years of college that allowed me to confront both why people could feel this way and just how many different paths the civilizations of the past, and the present, had to get there. Reading the Bible in it's entirety certainly accelerated the process as well.<BR/><BR/><I>Given these reasons how is the best way to debunk it?</I><BR/><BR/>That's a tough one and there is no easy answer. No matter what any of us say, most of the religious will, at best, be dismissive. Take this very discussion thread as an example. Regardless of what we say, it all comes back to feeling for them, and if we don't get these feeling, then it's just because we don't want them. Any attempts to get real answers or cohesive arguments out of them results in the same thing.<BR/><BR/>Also, what works on one person will probably not work on another, and there are a very large percentage that will simply close their ears to anything you say. I agree that having a cohesive set of logical reason that Christianity has flourished despite the evidence would be great, but I'm not sure how it's going to help in the long run. In the end, the average Christian doesn't seem to care so much if something is provable, so long as it feels good.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01496871164729312497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-61240190559044284862007-10-10T14:40:00.000-04:002007-10-10T14:40:00.000-04:00If we have an idea why Christianity flourishes, th...<B><BR/>If we have an idea why Christianity flourishes, then understanding this can help us to debunk it. Given these reasons how is the best way to debunk it?<BR/><BR/></B><BR/><BR/>I think the most vitally important thing for debunkers of religion to be aware of is that intellectual argument, while it may be effective for those individuals more inclined by temperment and interests toward rationality in the first place, is only part of the solution. Since most of us are deconverts because of intellectual difficulties with the claims of religion we tend to be a bit myopic in our approach.<BR/><BR/>I think we can all learn a lot by looking to the example of Julia Sweeney. She does something which is much more likely to have an effect on the thinking of a broader audience than bare intellectual argumentation----she tells the story of her deconversion in LETTING GO OF GOD in its personal and emotional aspects as much as in its intellectual content.<BR/><BR/>Just a few of the things we should focus on:<BR/><BR/>--open and personally engaging deconversion stories.<BR/><BR/>--the positive emotional and societal benefits of critical thinking (with a particular focus on specific examples rather than general and theoretical discussions of the topic).<BR/><BR/>--the promotion of openness in one's religious skepticism among the atheist/agnostic community. The more people there are who are casually open with the fact that they're skeptical of religion the easier it will be for believers to question their own articles of faith.David B. Ellishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09468191085576922813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-91879018667387783572007-10-10T14:18:00.000-04:002007-10-10T14:18:00.000-04:00The bible does indicate that the nations will turn...<I>The bible does indicate that the nations will turn against religion and set out to destroy it, or seriously minimize its influences.</I><BR/><BR/>The bible also indicates that insects have four feet, and bats are birds. Forgive me if I don't take Biblical prophecy seriously.<BR/><BR/><I>It is imploding before our very eyes. It has been hijacked by its fundemental elements and is now consuming its own.</I><BR/><BR/>I'm glad you admitted that Christianity is falling to the same influences. However, I would argue with your assertion that Islam is failing. <A HREF="http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm" REL="nofollow">Recent statistics show that Islam is increasing in membership while Christianity (and unfortunately, "no religion") is falling.</A><BR/><BR/>How now, brown cow?<BR/><BR/><I>The reason that other religious organizations (ie Buddhism) have flourished is because those that are following these religious organizations are doing exactly what their flesh desires to do.</I><BR/><BR/>You clearly know nothing of Buddhism or other world religions. Fasting is common in many religions, which is directly opposite the desires of the flesh (indeed, their purpose is to deny the desires of the flesh). Please refrain from speaking when you are sadly in ignorance.<BR/><BR/><I>They are trying to please a diety with their actions, leaving them in charge of what they do.</I><BR/><BR/>Do I, or do I not, have to profess a belief in God and Jesus and repent of my sins in order to be saved? You Christians just have different actions that tend to be less overt; however, they are still actions that are required for salvation.<BR/><BR/>Your "reasons" why Judaism have flourished are word salad; it flourishes because it is rejects Christ and waits for the real Messiah? That's not a reason; that's just what they believe.Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-83641395894978619492007-10-10T14:14:00.000-04:002007-10-10T14:14:00.000-04:00Chris: "Zilch- It is imploding before our very eye...Chris: "Zilch- It is imploding before our very eyes. It has been hijacked by its fundemental elements and is now consuming its own."<BR/><BR/>Absolutely false. Islam is growing and flourishing at an unprecedented rate as its sphere of influence expands to a degree unsurpassed in history. Currently it is among the fastest growing religions on the earth - a fact to which even Christians will frequently attest as they stress the need for more missionaries to Islamic nations.<BR/><BR/>Islam is, unfortunately, not going anywhere. As Christianity slowly begins to fade in the Western world (as it has almost entirely done in Europe), the Muslim spiritual empire grows stronger by the day. Even in largely post-Christian nations such as France (or even a "Christian" nation such as England), Islam is gaining a foothold such as it has not seen since the glory days of the Ottoman Empire.Calebhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17175173998016520555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-48096714089516834562007-10-10T14:10:00.000-04:002007-10-10T14:10:00.000-04:00In response to Prup (aka Jim Benton), there are cl...In response to Prup (aka Jim Benton), there are clear examples of Christians being silences in this country. One that may interest you just happened September 13, 2007. Four Christians were arrested for praying in a New York public park. If you want to read the article, go to familynewsinfocus.com and type in "Christians Fight for the Right to Pray in Park"back to the basics christianityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12693658744756450065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-23760183968770742022007-10-10T14:03:00.000-04:002007-10-10T14:03:00.000-04:00"If it's so unstoppable, why can't I see the evide..."If it's so unstoppable, why can't I see the evidence of its works? If it's so efficient, why can't it find a way to reveal itself to me?"<BR/><BR/>Godless Geek - Its works are demonstrated at the grass roots level, and are often obscured by the large shameful headlines generated by the faux Christians who seek their own glory via secular power structures. True Christianity, grass roots Christianity is growing and expanding to the four corners of the globe. The bible is available now in almost all languagues and in conformance with our commission, the good news is being spread throughout the inhabited earth.<BR/><BR/>As to your 2nd question, you simply aren't open to it. I liken it to a radio frequency. Our brains act as receivers of messages, similar to the way radio's pick up radio waves. You don't hear a message, simply because you aren't tuned into the frequency.Chris Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13134785155889204025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-79359595610076703832007-10-10T13:56:00.000-04:002007-10-10T13:56:00.000-04:00"Then why, pray tell us Chris, does Islam flourish..."Then why, pray tell us Chris, does Islam flourish?"<BR/><BR/>Zilch- It is imploding before our very eyes. It has been hijacked by its fundemental elements and is now consuming its own.<BR/><BR/>To some extent, Christianity is doing something similar with its double dealings, cozying up to the power structures, co-opting the political process, pedophile priests, etc.<BR/><BR/>The bible does indicate that the nations will turn against religion and set out to destroy it, or seriously minimize its influences.Chris Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13134785155889204025noreply@blogger.com