Wait! He's not real? But those noodly appendages....   : )

He's real in our hearts :)

I've been reading your other posts in this thread and I just have to say, God bless you dude, God bless you.

Don't let them wear you out though, cause some these dudes can be really onesided, as I'm sure you've noticed. They seemingly believe that people are born Christians or Religious, and if not, they are stupid for chosing Christianity or a Religion, and cannot possibly get to that state by matters of reason, logic or evidence. Ultimately, that it's impossible for Science and Religion to exist together, as many Christians believe.

Anyways, cary on.

Actually no one has tried to eradicate Christianity since Constantine made it the official religion of the Roman Empire, although it has done quite a good job of eradicating itself since all of the major claims that it made Millenia ago have been proven to be wrong since the advent of the Age of Scientific Inquiry and the Scientific Revolution.  As for Jesus dieing on the cross, there's a great deal of scholarly debate on that point.  The Apostle Paul never mentioned how Jesus died in his various writings, and even if he did die on the cross, the earliest version of the earliest of the Biblical Gospels, "The Gospel of Mark", doesn't mention that he resurrected and most scholars now think that the account of Jesus' resurrection in the version of Mark that we have today was only added some 50 or so years after Mark was originally written 30+ years after the supposed death of Jesus of Nazareth to bring it into line with the other Gospels.

Look there is nothing wrong with having faith in things. As long as you are honest with yourself. If you are making a choice to believe in something that isn't supported by fact or reason. There isn't something insidious about copping to what you are doing. If you have an emotional need for something, and embrace something to give your life some greater meaning. I don't think anyone is particularly troubled by that. The real problem is when people decide to be disingenuous about what they are doing.

It is one thing to intentionally delude oneself, but when you deny that is what you are doing, and blindly defend that faith when you know damned well that there isn't any evidence to support that claim. Then you are trying to twist reality to suit your own purposes. It is fundamentally a perverse act, because it is a egocentric mania. It isn't that you really believe. You are just so self absorbed, and so terrified of your own fears. That you are embracing a lie, and it isn't unwarranted to call someone out when they are lying through their teeth.

How is it wrong to expect genuine honesty from others. There are a lot of people of faith. Who understand that it isn't necessarily true in the literal sense, but that it is a frame work that they are using for personal growth, or as a world view. You don't have to believe Jesus was God. To think that his world view is the one you like the most. It isn't even wrong to pattern your life after his.

What is wrong is to use faith as a excuse to be ignorant, or to demand ignorance of others. It isn't a beautiful act. It is simple cowardice masquerading as enlightenment. If your view of faith is something to be obedient to so you don't have to look into the abyss. Then you have completely missed the point. You have to stare into that pit for a good long time if you truly intend to grow as a individual. Faith should be a avenue for thought, and not a military march from the cradle to the grave.

Anyway I am about done with this thread, and I concede the author has something of a point. It is really kind of a pointless exercise to talk to people. Who are not only willfully ignorant, but intentionally obtuse, because they are too scared to admit that their belief stems from a deep need or want. Rather then it being some kind of self evident fact.

Actually, there have been studies proving that an overwhelming majority of religious folks (like 98%) are born into a religion;  only a tiny minority ever actuallyswitch religions or chose their own, the rest just go with whatever religion their parents gave them.  So yes, there's good reason to believe people are 'born religious'.  

And the theme of this thread is really not that hard to grasp.  I did make it clear in the original post that you can believe what you want, just keep it to yourself unless you can substantiate your claims.  If you believe baby jesus bestowed upon us love and grace, then so be it.  If you think Odin and Thor were responsible, then so be it.  But if you actually believe that, and are willing to take what should be a personal matter into public, then you should be willing and ready to face criticism of that belief.  

I, for instance, am not monogamous.  I don't believe in monogamy, I believe in doing what makes you feel good as long as you're smart about it, and that viewpoint is not popular at all, so I wouldn't dare TELL people that part of my personal life unless I was willing to defend my stance with facts, reason, and logic.  Same thing with being bisexual, I don't go screaming "I fuck men and women" from rooftops, but I have no problem talking about it to those who are curious.  Religion is just a personal preference, NOT an absolute truth of the world, so would it kill people to not push it on others or pretend that 'god's word' has more say than law, logic, science, rationality, or social guidelines?  

The entire point of this thread was "Keep religion out of anything that isn't a church or your own home."  

So is this an attempt at censorship? Please clarify. I don't mind criticism, but I don't feel like just because I have a different viewpoint that doesn't fit someone's template that I should be attacked out-right either. I don't attack other people for their own beliefs, in fact I completely understand and honor an athiest's POV out of my own experiences. I may not be real interested in every single criticism some people may have, but I do consider their viewpoint too as part of living.

Really honestly, I have no idea who exactly you are targetting with your message. So are you saying people shouldn't even talk about it or are you just saying people shouldn't push it? It sounds like you're trying to intimidate. If I give respect to others just as much as I expect it... if the problem here is that some random people on the internet made you feel disgruntled, then you have to consider the venue and the source. If you have no malice towards others for having opposite beliefs and totally respect it, then this thread existing is no problem for me whatsoever... it's the fact that you seem to almost hint at the desire to intimidate or suppress someone's expression and that seems in itself more than nuetral, more hostile.

What happened to just random conversation without the fear that you may be attacked for what you believe in? I don't get that thinking. I shouldn't have to suppress casual conversation just because it may open an argument... I can politely say it's my opinion and leave it there. I have no beef with anyone else who thinks differently...  but why does every discussion about religion and spirituality have to turn to an exhausting debate? Wasn't the point of your thread against debates that go no where?

I have been avoiding your remarks because I feel your comments come under the pressure of wanting to force an opinion, not to reason with... the only thing I have to say is you're making a mistake by assuming other people's reasoning and state of mind with your comments. You have asked for something that is very reasonable and respectable (the underlined), but then suddenly you are telling people that when they do, they are doing it out of emotional need. You have determined their purpose for them. This is your assumption based off of an observation... it's not proven fact, but you've disguised an opinion as fact. I do believe there is greater purpose in life than just doing things out of simple emotional need. These are my values. It's not as cut and dry for me as I do it out of emotional need. Many things have happened in my life that have altered the way I perceive things and how I view the spiritual. Your opinion may completely differ and that's fine, I totally respect that and hats off if your life has taken you somewhere else... but your request is a trap to get people to conform to your point of view of religion/spirituality. It's not reasonable. It comes with strings attached that are borderline demeaning to someone who truly has a different take on life than you.

Edit: I edited some.

The question should be in the modern age should believers be able to deny others basic human rights just because of what it says in a thoroughly discredited Bronze Age book.  People should be allowed to believe whatever they want to although if it's false, you should try to teach them what is actually real; however, in a country founded on the separation of state and that which has been demonstrated to be false since the original Constitution was written, the question becomes should that which is false be allowed to dictate the policies of society ( when the Founders called for a separation in the first place)  You wouldn't want a known schizophrenic with his hand on the big red nuclear button would you?

I think a more fair consensus is this. If you can't back something up in the real world, it should not affect what others can and can't do in the real world. And if you state your opinion or beliefs, you should always be prepared for it to be critisized.