Church History In Plain Language (4th edition)

Because it's subjective. I doubt that very much. Every flavor-of-the-month apologist that you've brought up has been a Bible-denier. If they were really "teaching" what the Bible says, you wouldn't be so terrified of discussing them honestly. As i said, because it's subjective. It has no more relevance than my favorite movie or my favorite flavor of ice cream.It's subjective. What part of that do you not understand?Everybody has their own subjective experiences. They're all colored by the environment we grew up in. There is no universal truth to anybody's subjective experiences. Liar. I have never reached that conclusion. That is not a jump. It's a logical progression which I have explained to you. So does Treasure Island. But it is a story. So, one more time: Why have YOU not been transformed?

Of course I care to argue. We are ALL "being transformed" - some for the better, some for the worse. The fact is that there is NO correlation between "transformation" and Christianity.

For one thing, you said it was.For another thing, there are thousands of religions on earth and millions of "subjects", each of them with his/her own experiences. Not "my" evodence. EVERYBODY's evidence, including yours. EVERYTHING depends on evidence, whether it's spooks - holy or unholy - or Bigfeet or leprechauns or electrons. That's a king-sized cop-out. You've contrived your fictional entities so that they can not be quantified or measured. That's a problem for the Bible Thumpers. The Qur'an Thumpers say the same thing and the Dyanetics Thumpers say the same thing. The only link to reality that we can rely on is evidence that we all agree on. On the contrary, I embrace it as a story. You're the one who dismisses the story when it doesn't suit your own made-up wishes. You've backed yourself into that corner. I have never suggested that you should sell everything. I have asked you why you don't - and how you can claim to be a follower of Jesus when you don't follow what He said. YOU are the one who is dismissing the story. Once upon a time, Charlie Brown wondered the same thing: Why did the author write the book? Linus replied, "Maybe he needed the money."There are many reasons for writing books. What makes you think the Bible does?And again for the umpteenth time, if you think the events are real, why do you deny what Jesus said? Not at all. It has the relevance that the evidence gives it. Any thinking person gives it the same relevance. And rightly so. There is no evidence that you or any other character is "eternally alive", so the claim is assigned to fiction. Once again, we fall back on, "By their fruits ye shall know them." If somebody claims to know "universal truth" and claims to see things that us ordinary peons don't see, we look for the fruits that they produce - i.e. we look for the evidence. Note that Jesus wasn't as contemptuous of evidence as you are. Which is why we need to make every effort to be objective and not cling to our individual perceptions.

You're the guy who mocks thinking and says it's a bad idea.And you're the guy who rejects what Christ said. In the sixties I was pretty religious. By stereotyping me, you're just making a fool of yourself. Really, stop being an idiot.

Of course it does. External stimuli can influence the transformation but only the mind itself can "control" the transformation.Do you think the mind can be programmed? Parents. teachers. etc. can provide information but they can't control what the mind does with it. That's why we have rational people and the idiots who voted for Trump coming out of the same schools.

But it doesn't work. Catholic kids are more likely than most to operate outside their "programming". You can influence what people will do, just like you can convince people to wear masks by telling them the science is behind it.My point with Phat was that the mind does change itself as a response to the stimuli that it receives, which is what you are saying.The Catholic kids also receive stimuli from non-Catholic friends, from books that they're "not allowed to read", etc. They can not be programmed; they can only be influenced.The German people quickly became disillusioned with Nazi propaganda and needed the Gestapo to keep them in line. Your computer needs no Gestapo to police its programming.And the mind does not need an external entity like a holy spook to change it.

Where did I do that? When have i ever rejected the possibility of a God interacting with humanity?For God's sake, when you reply to me, reply to me, not to the crap that you make up in your head. Critical thinking doesn't limit anybody. Jumping to the conclusions that you have been spoon-fed limits you.And again, again, again... I have considered unevidenced events. They go into the unevidenced pile. No evidence for a "living God" goes into the same pile as no evidence for leprechauns. You also have an unevidenced pile. You're just not consistent about what you put in it. Of course. Do you honestly believe that somebody who doesn't believe Frodo is real can understand The Lord of the Rings? Why don't you ever address that point? I didn't say a word about Asimov. You have no clue about what he was familiar with. Nor do you. By their fruits ye shall know them. And yet some Christians think that Christians are qualified to explain the Qur'an. Exactly. You are admitting that what you've been taught is nothing but propaganda. It can't stand on its own. It has to be protected from outside influences. That's pretty weak for "absolute truth".

No, it wasn't a matter of substituting one "something" for another. It was removing a worthless something, taking out the trash. No. But that isn't the same as believing one doesn't exist. It's the belief that doesn't exist. Fundamentalist Christianity is much more lacking in truth and love. Nonsense. There is no "higher power". By their fruits ye shall know the people who think there is.