Searching for GOD...

[Alan Burns]

Since you seem to be in the speculation business, it's every bit as possible that two millennia from now Christianity will have gone the way of Graeco-Roman religion - a few adherents here and there, but essentially defunct. Why not? The world is littered with dead religions. They're born, they live, and they also die. There is nothing - absolutely nothing - that makes Christianity exempt from this process.

Nothing at all.

Apart from the resurrection.

[Gordon]

Jesus never wrote anything which was passed on, yet two thousand years on He remains the most influential human being who ever lived.  On the evolutionary time scale we are still in the early stages of the impact of Christianity.

Wishful thinking, Alan - Christianity will no doubt have some following for a while yet but it is in irreversible decline: this from BBC just 3 days ago highlights the situation here in Scotland, where it looks bleak for the CofS  - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-40467084

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Apart from the resurrection.

Not that you care (redux), but that's called the fallacy of reification.

You can't just assert "the resurrection" as if it was a fact rather than just an expression of your personal faith. It's the logical equivalent of you asking what makes my leprechaunism exempt from expiry and my replying, "apart from the pots of gold at the ends of rainbows".   

[Shaker]

Apart from the resurrection.

I was referring to real things that actually happen.

[Alan Burns]

That's a new one to me - thanks for that. Tucked away for future reference the next time somebody peddles the "Oh, Lewis was simply maaaaahvellous" line 

Do you really feel justified in dismissing all of Lewis' profound Christian works on the strength of this one line?

[Alan Burns]

I was referring to real things that actually happen.

So was I

[Gordon]

Apart from the resurrection.

Which is just a story, Alan, where there are no good reasons to take this story seriously.

Since, and I've often asked this of Christians, there seems to have been no attempt to address the risk of mistakes or lies in the NT text this resurrection claim can just be dismissed.

[torridon]

Apart from the resurrection.

That's hardly unique to Christianity; many early mythologies featured similar narratives of deity death and resurrection.

[Shaker]

Do you really feel justified in dismissing all of Lewis' profound Christian works on the strength of this one line?

No, I feel justified in dismissing all of Lewis's dismal tripe on the strength of those works of his I've wasted my precious time reading.

[Shaker]

So was I

Prove it.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Do you really feel justified in dismissing all of Lewis' profound Christian works on the strength of this one line?

That's called the fallacy of the straw man: he didn't say that at all.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

So was I

Then the burden of proof to demonstrate it rather than just assert it is ahead of you still.

[Shaker]

AB,

Then the burden of proof to demonstrate it rather than just assert it ahead of you still.

Well, I for one am all ears.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Incidentally Alan, you claimed somewhere that you understood the meaning of the term "logical fallacy" yet it's a rare post from you that doesn't contain one or several of them. What should we make of this: that you actually have no idea of the meaning (and why it matters); or that you do know but you think it's just fine to rely on them nonetheless?

You also told us that you have in the locker some cogent logic for your beliefs, but you don't have the time to tell us what it is even though you do have the time to post lots of broken logic.

If you're sincere in wanting other people to agree with you, why do that when logic would be more effect than illogic?   

[Nearly Sane]

Do you really feel justified in dismissing all of Lewis' profound Christian works on the strength of this one line?

  That's such an egregious misrepresentation of what was said. I suggest you owe Shaker an apology for doing so. Else it will be obvious that you are just choosing to lie.

It's also begging the question but then you appear to not understand that.

[Shaker]

  That's such an egregious misrepresentation of what was said. I suggest you owe Shaker an apology for doing so. Else it will be obvious that you are just choosing to lie.

It's also begging the question but then you appear to not understand that.

Thanks, but it's OK. It's not as though I mind, or even expect any better 

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

That's such an egregious misrepresentation of what was said. I suggest you owe Shaker an apology for doing so. Else it will be obvious that you are just choosing to lie.

I think you'll find that, for AB and Vlad both, telling lies is fine provided they're doing it for Jesus.

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

I think you'll find that, for AB and Vlad both, telling lies is fine provided they're doing it for Jesus.

Still see no proper evidence that AB is deliberately telling a mistruth. Though were he not to apologise here having had his error pointed out? it would seem to me tantamount ti doing so. Usually in such positions he retracts.

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

Still see no proper evidence that AB is deliberately telling a mistruth. Though were he not to apologise here having had his error pointed out? it would seem to me tantamount ti doing so. Usually in such positions he retracts.

Probably fair enough - if the error isn't withdrawn or is repeated despite having it explained, then it's hard to see how it isn't a lie. Vlad seems positively to relish in his mendacity (though i have no idea what he gets from it) but AB perhaps deserves a little more slack on this issue at least.

[Spud]

One that doesn't like gay correction facilities?

Over the last few decades, yes. Before that, it was known that gay correction therapy, as you put it, should not be attempted unless the person actually wanted to change his or her orientation.

[Spud]

Like burning "witches" or torturing non adherants maybe?
You can keep it.

Burning a witch was part of the system put in place by God to ensure that the promise of a Saviour was fulfilled. Torturing non adherent? Where is that in the bible?

[Shaker]

Burning a witch was part of the system put in place by God to ensure that the promise of a Saviour was fulfilled.

Oh well. Now you put it like that ...

[floo]

Burning a witch was part of the system put in place by God to ensure that the promise of a Saviour was fulfilled. Torturing non adherent? Where is that in the bible?

And you think that acceptable?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Wishful thinking, Alan - Christianity will no doubt have some following for a while yet but it is in irreversible decline: this from BBC just 3 days ago highlights the situation here in Scotland.

Isn't that what they said about the tories?

I see it's growing in China though. To see that as unimportant or insignificant is a teensy bit old school imperialistic for my liking.

I guess what i'm trying to say is Dalriada is not the beginning nor ends of the Earth.

[Gordon]

Isn't that what they said about the tories?

I see it's growing in China though. To see that as unimportant or insignificant is a teensy bit old school imperialistic for my liking.

I guess what i'm trying to say is Dalriada is not the beginning nor ends of the Earth.

If what you were trying to say was something intelligible then I regret to say you've failed.