Why is your religon true and not the religion of others?

Your re-write only goes to underscores slevesques' point - I'm inclined to agree with you in a global sense. I mean why does 90% or so of the Irish populace self-identify as Christian (Roman Catholic)? I'd suppose it's for the reason you suggest above. But why does perhaps 90% of that 90% not attend church on Sundays? I'd suppose that the reason for that has something to do with the fact that the vast majority of Roman Catholics aren't Christians (not that church-going in itself is a sure sign of anything). The same thing could possibly be said of the U.S.In other words, it's impossible to establish your point for want a way of figuring out who the true Christian is. By all means use the measuring stick of self-identification. It need not be a useful one.

Okay.. I don't think there's any doubt that he is a Christian based on evidence. I think your objection centres on what you feel is a wrong conclusion drawn regarding the evidence. The Bible (for example) is evidence submitted into both his and your court. Slevesque examines it, finds it's astounding wisdom and delicate coherancy an sign of a source beyond man. You examine it and conclude it (perhaps) the musings of a bunch of sheepherders.Might not be the problem with you .. and not the evidence? And I'd agree with that. What I'm trying to point out though is that 'cultural Christianity' would be different from 'God-instigated Christianity (in the case that God-instigated Christianity existed) and that from your perspective, both would look pretty much the same. No you're not - but that's not my problem. Even a cursory inspection past the fact of Catholic Ireland would give you reason to question your broad brush stroke argument:- iano was more of less ignorant of things Christian/Roman Catholic. I went to mass about 6 times in my life, would have answered "Matthew, Mark, Luke and John" had someone asked me what the gospel was, wouldn't have known that Samson, David & Goliath and a parted Red Sea were biblical tales. I was astounded to learn that Genesis was other than a rock band.- the God of Roman Catholicism has far more in common with the Allah of Islam than the God of biblical grace I believe in. I'm as counter-my-culture as the Irish atheist is. I've pointed out one part of the problem for you: not all who say "Lord, Lord" will enter the Kingdom of God. Another part of the problem is that not all who are saved will have self-identified as Christians. How could they do so if they've never heard the Christian gospel. Those who are saved yet don't identify so will in all likelyhood come from those parts of the world where Christs name wasn't/ isn't/won't be heard. God isn't limited by geography in his querying the answer of a mans heart.Edited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Indeed. Point being, the issue isn't so much the evidence as the view on holds regarding the evidence. I don't think Slevesque is a cultural Christian, no. And I wasn't programmed with the view that the Bible was the word of God. Doesn't that neutralise your contention that people are the inevitable products of their culture? It's not relevant how I know. The point is that you're supposing a particular view (cultural influence explains all) correct, yet you have no way of calibrating things to find how how accurate you are being. This becomes problematic when faced with a 'religion' which supposes false professions endemic. It was important enough for him to scatter disciples to the wind. I'm just not convinced that the preached gospel is the only way for God to act. Depends on whether he's a God-called Christian (heaven) or a cultural Christan (hell, if he remains that way). I've no idea which he is.Edited by iano, : No reason given.