Why are you (still) a Christian?

[tackattack]

---

Thanks for the response.

It seems that personal religious experience is integral to why you believe.

If you hadn't have had any religious experiences, it seems the sole foundation for your belief would just be the historical resurrection argument, which itself largely presupposes that the arguments for God's existence work and rely on some very arguable subjective interpretations of the very limited sources we have.

Do you think you'd still be a believer if you had never had any religious experiences, whether internal or external?

---

Wow.. 15 pages I don't think I'm going to bother catching up on. Again @FrustratedFool, please quote me in the reply or mention if you'd like a quicker response, typically I just look at today's posts when I log unless someone specified my username.


No, I don't think I would consider myself a Christian without religious experience and an understanding of the Bible. Mainly because of the definition of Christian (follower of Christ) which necessitates both an "knowledge of" and a "relationship with". The relationship really is the crux of the definition of being a Christian for me. If the knowledge base I grew up in was Hindu instead of Christianity, I might very well have attributed it to Shiva, Vishnu or  Kalki (sp?).