Testing The Christian Apologists

Pretty well. We can't grow bananas in Saskatchewan but we can get 'em. And as my father used to say, we can't eat all of the wheat we grow. I don't think you're using a valid metric. Jesus Himself seemed to measure value not by how much you give but by how much you keep back for yourself - e.g. two mites is more than bags and bags of gold.

..and yet we still have trade wars and even strikes so that the wheat doesn't always get to market. I agree with that but in our case we aren't a rich church.

There aren't many things in the world that work perfectly all of the time. That's no reason to dismiss the value of social interaction.

So we agree that regardless of belief, 'all you need is love. Given that all you need is love, the argument is not that god is redundant, it's that religion is redundant - including Christianity.

Obviously this is true in your mind because in your mind God does not even exist. I would argue, however, that religion and God are inseparable. Perhaps if God did exist (in your mind) either you or He would have to go, thus avoiding redundancy.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

It's not about me!!! It's about what your book says. GDR tells us that Jesus tells us love is all you need, therefore relious belief is redundant. That's not an argument, that's just you saying something you want to be true. Uh? It's not about me. Please follow the argument.

And it's about how people (you, me, GDR) respond to what the book says. Otherwise, why bring it up? You cant walk into Faith & Belief and attempt to reduce belief to a verifiable science-based philosophy. If you had wanted this in a Science Forum I never would have commented at all. You have to deal with people's beliefs if you expect to form theories about morals, behaviors, and beliefs.

Yes, by ignoring what it says and believing what you want to believe instead. There's nothing scientific or philosophical in pointing out what Jesus says in your book. You're more than a little confused - this is not my thread.

Ever hear of idolatry? Idolatry is making a religion of something that is not God. Idolatry does not need God.

On the contrary, you can not form theories about anything based on beliefs. Theories are based on facts.

Well if so, idolatry needs the "something" that you gave it..whatever word you chose to label 'it' as.

But that something can be entirely imaginary. You can build a religion based entirely on imagination - and most people do. Religion requires no god and God - if there was one - requires no religion.

OK, I'll go with that for now. I believe that there is no need for me to ask "which God" I am relating to as I believe that God wants me to seek Him and only the God with the power to draw me closer is, in fact, the real one. I do not worry about satan getting in the way and impersonating God, for I do not believe that Satan even has such power or capability. And I suppose that I could agree that my beliefs don't even require a God as they are products of my desires and imagination.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

That's where I disagree with you. I think "Satan" definitely can - and does - impersonate "God". Your "experiences" of God are just as likely to be experiences of Satan.But of course Satan is not an outside entity - and neither is God.

To sum up your point, you really mean that the easiest person to fool is ourselves. This is why I listen to varied points of view regarding God, religion, and other people's POV concerning the existence of and characteristics of God.I've gone far deeper than many if not most Christians whom I know would have dared to go. I listened to Dan Barker and Matt Dillahunty. I listened to several podcasts describing some honestly introspective deconversion experiences.And of course, I endlessly discuss these things with you and jar even though I do not agree with your world view ideas that humans create God. I believe that God is also external to us as is Satan.