My debate in Christian Forums in full swing

[greneknight]

To you, dropping superstition is dropping CHristianity

Xtianity IS superstition. Without it there is nothing left.

As H. L. Mencken observed....

"There is no possibility whatsoever of reconciling science and theology, at least in Christendom. Either Jesus rose from the dead or he didn't. If he did, then Christianity becomes plausible; if he did not, then it is sheer nonsense."

Lacking evidence of any "resurrection" I go with sheer nonsense.

I have no doubt Jesus didn't rise from the dead. But we talk about him rising from the dead in order to teach a lesson. In other words, his rising from the dead is only metaphorical. Like Aesop's Fables. But you don't have to throw the baby with the bath water. Get rid of the superstition but we can keep the culture and the stories of our ancestors. Yes, the stories are a bit screwed up but aren't all ancient stories like that?

---

To avoid confusion, I will use this font size for my reply.

1. what made you choose your Protestant Bible with 66 books?

Why do you suppose I only chose the protestant bible with 66 books?

It's obvious. There's no reason to hide. Since you do use the Protestant Bible with 66 books, you might as well come clean and admit it.

2. Which Church Council do you accept as legitimate for your Canon of Scriptures?

The one that settled with the 66 known books of the protestant bible.

I know of no church council that settled on only the 66 books of the Protestant Bible. Can you tell me which church council that is? Come on, if it's a council you accept, surely you'd know the name of it.

3. What basis have you got for rejecting the other Church Councils?

none.

If you have no basis to reject the other Church councils, can I assume that you accept ALL church councils? If not, are you then admitting that you reject church councils without basis? What makes you choose which church councils to accept then?

4. Have you examined and researched on the legitimacy of the claims of the RCC for their canon and the claims of the Orthodox churches on their even larger canon?

Nooope

I thought so. Thanks for your honest reply.

Anyway, Drich, you did say you would be happy to answer any questions I might have and you probably won't give me Godschild's reply.

As you can see I did not Give you Godschild's response. Nor did I give you the legalistic response you were looking to argue either.. so what did i do? Am I so foolish as to not know what I believe, nor where it came from? or am i setting you up to make a seemingly easy/homerun assertion, that will make you look foolish??? Or am I giving you an oppertunity to ask more questions... Maybe it's all three, maybe it none of the above.. Let see what you do next!