Existence of Demons (and Angels)

Nothing. Faith's perceptions are just as real to him ot her as mine are to me. The difference is I don't think my perceptions superior to the facts about reality that can be ascertained by scientific rationalism. Faith and you can believe what you want as strongly as you want, but when a claim of fact is made, we need more then subjective impressions.

That's nice that you think that. Can you show evidence that your belief is factual?Of course not.

Of course there is nothing wrong with being a Christian. Believe what you will.When you make claims about what you believe, there can be no debate... you are the only authority in that. When anyone makes a claim of fact about reality, then evidence is required to support the fact.You claim that all other mythologies are fairy tales but yours is not. That's a claim of objective fact. Care to back it up? That's what I was saying you can't do, because I have seen the effort made time and again (here and elsewhere) and it has invariably failed.

Why not? The fact that you can't provide it? That's not a good enough reason for me.

So you say. Why should I believe it? Faith and Mike The Wiz both made claims of fact based on nothing but their opinion. That's what I was responding to. No, I think my beliefs more accurately reflect the way the world really is. The reason I think that is I go with fact, not opinion. If that is your criteria for better, fine. It isn't mine. This is both wrong and insulting. Because you can't look beyond yourself, you are somehow beyond me, and I presume anyone who disagrees with you? That is utterly foolish.I was a theist. If your picture is recent, I was a theist when I was your age. I left your mindset behind, because I saw it's flaws. So, it isn't that I haven't reached it, it's that I have moved past it.

That's all very cute, but what does it mean beyond "I think it, I think it's really cool, and if you don't agree with me it's because you haven't tried hard enough". Bull. This is typical theist arrogance. The attitude that says "If you don't agree with me then you have a problem" is rank, disgusting arrogance and you are demonstrating it very effectively. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are defficient. It means they may be wrong. How do you decide who's right? By looking at evidence (not Faith's "witness evidence" either) if any exists. Otherwise you're just sharing opinions, and you know what they say opinions are like. You don't know what I see. You are wrong to claim that you do. Once you admit the possibility that I, or more importantly anyone who disagrees with you, may in fact be seeing more than you, you will have taken a real step.Also, don't give me the old saw about how I can't understand a believers standpoint because I am not one (I was and no longer am) or that I wasn't a "real" believer becasue I would never have left the faith if I were. I have been where you are.This is the behavior G. Krull was commenting on and he was right. For one, your idea that your subjective opinion is of any value. It could be the result of insanity, drugs, or just good old fashioned stupidity. No one has any way of knowing, so we have learned to use the scientific method and to determine fact. As I said, make a staement as to your opinion and no one will care. Make a statement of fact and try and use nothing but your opinion to support it and you'll get people riled up around here.Finally, my statement that "I go with fact, not opinion" refers to the fact that I make every effort to keep my opinion where it belongs and limit my claims of fact to actual facts. This is something that many theists on this board seem to have a real problem with.

At this point I certainly will not. I have read the article you cite. It concludes that the only two sources for an historical Christ are the Bible and the writings of Josephus. I will accept the writer's contention up to that point.The writings of Josephus are highly contreversial and most scholars believe the passages about Jesus were post hoc additions. I am not prepared to make that statment unsupported, so I will be locating some supporting research to cite.As to the historical value of the new testament (I think it is obvious that the old testament is worthless historically), I also assert that it is no good source. Again, I will be back with references.By the way, your interpertation of the nature of the infidels website seems to be very mistaken.I will be back with references.

Again, prove it.Wait, you don't have to. You believe it in spite of a lack of evidence and with the declaration that there is no evidence that can change your mind. Of course, since Faith believes it, it must be true.Let's see... holding a belief not only with no proof but in spite of any imaginable proof to the contrary; what would one call that?

My education in mythology was wholly personal, begun by me and conducted with no guidance beyond wide reading. I was a Christian at the time and my initial forays were in the spirit of looking for a explaining parallels to Christianity. You see, it was done from a Christian point of view.It soon became apparent to me that the facts I was finding led to a single conclusion... all myths (including Christianity) teach the same lessons. The next question that occurred to me was "Since they all teach the same lessons, why is Christianity inherently better?" I found no answer and still haven't. Simply put, their isn't one.So, your ill-informed ranting about a "secular education nightmare" aside, you were completely wrong about my history of learning about myth. You are, yet again, wrong and arrogant, or perhaps you just don't read very well.You say that there is plenty to learn about myth that will not compromise a Christians faith. Well, after the week it takes to learn all that, there is a lot MORE to learn about myth that will make any thinking person start to have some doubts. That being the case, Faith, you are probably safe in reading all the myth you want and need have no fear of your faith being compromised.

And you would be right and that is what you are doing. You don't understand what constitutes evidence or proof and you are mistakenly accepting faulty examples of it.As I have said before, believe what you will, but when making claims of fact, bring some evidence along.

The metaphors involved are a good deal deeper and more profound then you imply. You oversimplify myth with such a cavalier dismissal and by implying that there is "meat" to christianity that does not exist in other myths, you do both yourself and the grand body of myth that exists a disservice. You also display your ignorance of myth.Oh, by the way, religion and myth are the same thing. Only if the one learning does not consider the matter too deeply. No, the similarities show the universality of the human experience and the differences are nothing more them cultural.