If faith works how every religion says it works......

[RAD]

I think one of the most remarkable things about religion, and Christianity in particular, is how much it has changed over the years. Looking at all of your research it is obvious that there are mountains of "evidence" or philosophies for numerous different religious sects. Even within Christianity blood has been shed for dogmatic differences. Saying that medieval Christians didn't know the word of Jesus or how to handle heretics seems awkward

But it is critical to any logical argument that the enlightenment was led by Christians who were Bible worms, like the Quakers and Methodists. it was said of William Garrison that he "really only read one book, the Bible." Lincoln credited him by name "and the abolitionist people" for ending slavery.

awkward when trying to reconcile with the purpose of Jesus' coming to Earth and the bible being written. Also curious is the constant back and forth between natural discovery and the church's position, with the church mostly rejecting initial claims, only to backtrack them as a gift from God later when their benefits have been proven. Why does God's position flip-flop so much and why are his right hand men so reluctant to accept the way the world works, if God created this universe wouldn't his primary vassals be more open to the truth than not?

Well no, I am simply making what Jesus said the standard, and claiming those who followed his mission statement would be greatly concerned about liberty and oppression.

I make this point because there has been much back and forth on this topic and it has been very intelligent and quite obviously well thought out. It was very interesting to read. However one can make the argument that the amount of change and information available to point to religious progress invalidates your argument of the bible's worth as any kind of divine guide.

No, that's why i pointed to specifics, while you seem to be merely generalizing. In fact I suggested relatively few have ever done what Jesus said, but those who did led the enlightenment, and then I proved it with facts, time frames and quotes rather than mere generalizations. (eg Jesus' own mission statement, how he said to treat heretics, his standard of behavior, etc)

And the church knew very well how to deal with heretics, and were quite capable of knowledge of Jesus' word; I highly recommend you read the Malleus Maleficarum to see what happened to people who questioned the church's authority.

Huh? Jesus said only the angels could separate the wheat from the tares, and to leave the tares alone. So you just proved my point yourself, no? Which makes me want to ask, respectfully, why don't you read it yourself instead of recommending I read periferal books? My educated guess is nobody really read the thing for about 1200 years. There were millions more Christians than Bibles soon after Constantine made Chrsitianity the latest fad religion. The Bible was a decoration for lecturns, basically, and of course people couldn't go up and actually read it. Then they started knocking off anybody who tried to publish it. Right? Medieval Chrsitians were lucky to touch a relic which was probably fake. Luther had to go find a Bible himself, as he never saw one during his training. And even he ignored some portions of it.

The only way to know you've made the right choice is to put your answer through the toughest tests of logic and evidence you can find, if your answer stands up then you can reasonably assume you're at least on the right track, and then you keep testing it, forever and ever without a bias as to keeping it or leaving it if it turns out wrong.

Which is what I did as well as anyone so far it appears.