The God Delusion

Originally Posted by Ed

Nope again.

Atheists no doubt claim that Christians try to ram their beliefs down their throats; I equally get fed up with atheists trying to persuade me that I'm wrong. I'm very happy with the Church of England, very happy to accept the virgin birth, and the resurrection. Scoff all you like, I don't care in the least. Not long back Rob, you wrote that all religious writings were rubbish. You're entitled to your views. I'm entitled to mine, and I happen to like the Christian story. Dawkins is entitled to his views too. I can't be arsed to read it, I've gone beyond the stage of needing to prove everything. As we're so near Christmas, I prefer the writings in the Book of Isaiah, 750 years before Christ was born, which predicted the event so well.

I don't claim to follow all Christian teachings, I fail all the time, and I can be as selective as the next person. I don't believe in creationism, for example - the account in Genesis is allegorical. I consider that there are only very few fundamental truths about being Christian, the two above are perhaps the most important.

It may surprise you that I just failed my work ethics test

I passed second time around though

[arc123]

I consider that there are only very few fundamental truths about being Christian, the two above are perhaps the most important.

Genuine question here Ed - I may have missed something in your post..... but what two points do you consider to be the fundamental parts of being a Christian?

Originally Posted by arc123

Genuine question here Ed - I may have missed something in your post..... but what two points do you consider to be the fundamental parts of being a Christian?

Belief in the virgin birth and belief in the resurrection.

I've been considering reading that book, but have avoided it so far for fear of it being a bit too ranty.

[arc123]

Belief in the virgin birth and belief in the resurrection.

ok thanks. So your religion allows you to select the bits that you find most appropriate? Out of interest - is this approach common in the C of E nowadays?

Originally Posted by arc123

ok thanks. So your religion allows you to select the bits that you find most appropriate? Out of interest - is this approach common in the C of E nowadays?

As common as those Islamists who interpret the Koran to suit their own purposes, milord.

Originally Posted by Mogs

Why is it the case that some people who have no belief in God feel it important to prove that individuals that do are in the wrong? Is it seated in a deep jealosy and the only way that they can feel good about themselves is to attempt to destroy the faith that others have.

Originally Posted by arc123

Nice stereotyping I suppose all religions need to feel persecuted don't they

Oops! Sometimes I feel just so, I don't need it, and I don't want it, as these are the times I am called to witness, this is always hard to do, as I risk losing friends for it.

Originally Posted by sarah

I've been considering reading that book, but have avoided it so far for fear of it being a bit too ranty.

It is slightly, it can be a bit wearing. It is based on scientific evidence mainly, unlike Christopher Hitchens book 'God is not great'. He takes a more historical and methodical approach and is probably the better first read.

[arc123]

As common as those Islamists who interpret the Koran to suit their own purposes, milord.

Not criticising here Ed, just interested......

Is there not some difference between interpretation, and being selective over which parts you wish tofollow/believe?

I agree with being selective - don't think the bible (or any other religious scripts) were ever meant as a manual to follow, simply to learn from. That would be my interpretation of a 'moderate'.

* Feet up on desk,pop corn in hand watching to see how this will all turn out.*