(October 25, 2015 at 7:07 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(October 25, 2015 at 6:49 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Such a world exists only in their minds.

But that's exactly the problem. It exists in all of their minds.

And as such, whenever they start to develop political clout (particularly in a democracy), they see no fault in that proposition. If  Christianity is true (or Islam, etc.; take your pick), becomes Since  Christianity is true... and then, to them, it is immoral not to apply its principles to others, even if the others don't understand why it's "necessary" to apply those regulations to their lives.

It is the entire basis of the Moral Majority movement that sprung up out of the Evangelicals in the Reagan years through the late 90s, and which continues to this day. We keep saying "the Justices would not allow it", forgetting that if the fundies can elect a radical into the Oval Office, he would happily stack the Supreme Court with Justices who are as religious-fanatic as Thomas and Scalia, ones who'd be glad to give a wink and a nod to theocracy in America.

That would be horrid. Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale gives us a pretty good idea of what a Christian theocracy would look like in the United States. We also have the Salam witch hunts, the crusades and the Inquisition.

They say they want to take the country back. Back to where?

You want to contemplate something terrifying? Something that will haunt your dreams and keep you awake at night? Imagine the surveillance technology the police and FBI use today in the hands of fundamentalists who have the power to force theocracy on us.

What's sad is if you tell Americans what could happen, the first thing they do is close their eyes and play their conspiracy theory card.

(October 25, 2015 at 4:38 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: I pointed to the Creed as a way of showing you that 1) we do know what the core beliefs are, contrary to your claim, and 2) we do discuss them routinely, contrary to your claim.

This other issue of whether Christians argue over core doctrines is a separate issue, but one which has also been answered in numerous threads, including this one.

As I said before, name a "core doctrine" on which Christians agree 100%, in your mind, and we will show you that your claim isn't true.

Even what one might think is a core doctrine, salvation through Jesus is not universally agreed upon. Catholics believe you have to have good works as well as faith. That is why protestants and evangelicals, particularly Calvinists, believe Catholics are not real Christians and are on their way to hell.

How can it be otherwise when in the Bible itself, Jesus says, Why do you call me Lord but don't do what I say? Everyone who calls me Lord will not enter my kingdom. But Paul tells us we are saved through faith without works. Christians make a wreck of logic and language trying to reconcile Paul with James.

How can you teach in agreement with a book that doesn’t even agree with itself?

It's all part of God's Clever Plan to make a book that can A) please multiple groups of adherents holding mutually-exclusive beliefs that they claim are based solidly on teachings in the book, and B) allow you to claim that anyone who opposes your faith-culture "just doesn't understand" the scriptures, when they point out the contrasting verses, or theological concepts of others.

What I can't understand is how they can do something so fundamentally (no pun intended) dishonest, and then have the gall to claim it is atheists who are the dishonest ones.

"Oh, I'm sorry Sister Christian, I didn't mean to read that verse you'd prefer we ignore in discovering The Core Doctrines™ of your religion."

(October 25, 2015 at 6:42 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Good for you, PT.

Though I must say, Yahweh did let his parental guard down and showed a little mercy by inviting Moses to look at his ass.

Would that be his timeless, spiritual, non-corporeal ass?

(October 25, 2015 at 5:44 pm)Esquilax Wrote: I'm still wondering how one differentiates between a core and peripheral doctrine, beyond "what Delicate needs at any given time." Right now this just seems like another one of those roadblock terms christian apologists are so fond of, that can be deployed any time there's a need to just halt a discussion before the christian is shown up as wrong, but has no set definition so it can apply to whatever's convenient.

Let Bill Maher help you.  Here he refers to those "core doctrines" as "The stupidest part!"

She certainly is not delicate about obfuscation.

(October 25, 2015 at 4:36 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(October 25, 2015 at 3:05 pm)Delicate Wrote: But since you brought it up, tell me, what are the different views on what it takes to get to heaven?

Can I get to heaven through good deeds, or am I locked out because I lack faith? Am I going to hell because I'm an atheist, or am I just going to be separated from god? Purgatory? What's hell like? Can practitioners of different religions get into heaven? Can practitioners of different sects of christianity get into heaven? How are sins interpreted by god? If you're saved once, are you always, or does it fade?

I have heard both answers to every one of those questions from christians. Each and every one of them acted as though the opposing answer was simply foolish. So, is this central tenet of christianity, that you labelled "of utmost importance," in another thread just another "peripheral doctrine"?

Which denomination says that good deeds are necessary or sufficient to get you to heaven? Which denomination says practitioners of different religions get into heaven? And which denominations say other sects of Christianity don't get into heaven? 

There's 40,000 denominations, atheists love telling me. There's sooo muchhhh doctrinal differences atheists love telling me. Now give me some specifics! 

Convince me this is more than an atheist fairytale. I want to believe.

(October 25, 2015 at 10:05 pm)Chuck Wrote: She certainly is not delicate about obfuscation.

I notice that any kind of discussion above a tenth-grade level gets labelled obfuscation or word-salad here.

And then they want to appeal to "science." 

Would be funny if atheists actually read any peer-reviewed scientific literature!

Why bother?  All you clowns want to talk about are iron age fairy tales.

(October 25, 2015 at 10:34 pm)Delicate Wrote:

(October 25, 2015 at 4:36 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Can I get to heaven through good deeds, or am I locked out because I lack faith? Am I going to hell because I'm an atheist, or am I just going to be separated from god? Purgatory? What's hell like? Can practitioners of different religions get into heaven? Can practitioners of different sects of christianity get into heaven? How are sins interpreted by god? If you're saved once, are you always, or does it fade?

I have heard both answers to every one of those questions from christians. Each and every one of them acted as though the opposing answer was simply foolish. So, is this central tenet of christianity, that you labelled "of utmost importance," in another thread just another "peripheral doctrine"?

Which denomination says that good deeds are necessary or sufficient to get you to heaven? Which denomination says practitioners of different religions get into heaven? And which denominations say other sects of Christianity don't get into heaven? 

There's 40,000 denominations, atheists love telling me. There's sooo muchhhh doctrinal differences atheists love telling me. Now give me some specifics! 

Convince me this is more than an atheist fairytale. I want to believe.

Do you not know how to use google? 

A comparison of the main 7, and a Q&A from Church Relevance.