The JEW?? - any relations to The MAN?

no one can be responsible for the killing of a fictional character except the author... or in this case authors.

Mr righteuous strikes again

I care because I dont like how he projects his angst of being a closet homo, into his jesus/scientology complex.

You say that like that is a bad thing- all those dudes should be put on trial

I think starting with any one of them would be a great start

how did you see and feel those miracles? colors, sensations or what ?

if you saw/felt miracles - then you did so with your senses - now everything your senses can see/smeel/feal/hear etc, scientist have tools to measure - or they can at least measure your brain while it is processing those sensations

By saying that the Bible predicted the coming of Chirst and how he died a "particular" death - I am assuming you mean that the old testament gives that prediction - if that is what you mean then that is not true - it doesnt give specifics on the coming Messiah, especially not about the particularities of his death

If you are on the other hand talking about the new testament than you should know that the oldest scriptures found on Jesus are written 150 years after his supposed death

about your law of contradiction you loose me at the start because you start by assuming (without proof - as religious people tend to do) that it is true and therfore other books cant be

And remember, the statement of the fact that a number of people saw Jesus die is made by people writing about the subject at least 150 years after the fact. Given that they didnt have cameras in those days - how sure do you think they can be?

and just wondering- how old are you?

I dont think a God exist, especially the kind that is described in the bible but I am interested in the reasons religious people give for bealiving in him/it/her

I admit the tagline is quite general (and I admit that I do like to make controverial taglines to spice things up)

But I think I make it clear in my first argument that I am talking about "the big three" and not in general. I have little or nothing against Zen, Daoism, all sorts of meditative "religious" practices, and to many religious practices to name here

To be more clear I think the Abrahamic three and Scientolgy are about the worst of the big ones, and Christianity in the USA especially scares me.

I do meditate myself from time to time and have drawn mostly from Daoism, Zen and Hermetic Qabalah concerning my methods of doing so

So it is not my aim to condem religious groups in general. The tagline was again just to get things going

Richard Dawkins idea of a meme was supposed to be analogus to a gene, not a virus.

Gene´s make up both cellular structures and viruses - viruses are in general distinct from cells in that they are parasites - i.e. not self sufficient.

I agree that meme theory is at least a great analog to evolutionary theory of genes - my point is that some cultural artifacts are meme´s and others are viruses: such as (in my opinion) the abrahamic relgions, piramid schemes of any kind, any kind of known ways to swindle, centrally controlled cults and probaby more things I cant remember.

I think promoters are to blame for a faulty product, and people who give them credit also share some of the blame for not thinking - following authority I think is a short cut to thinking.

I am a big fan of P2P and not so much of the classic school/lecture system and haven't attended a lecture in a while - so point well taken - school systems are corrupt too and generally promote other dangerous mental viruses such as patriotism which is a nice word for nationalism.

I dont get why you are disputing this but since you do I have to do so too.

No contest with your first argument

on the second: in terms of measuring matter in the universe the majority is chaotic (dark matter)

on the third argument; I think you are just stretching the word "informed" but Ill give some qualification: on the scale of 1 too 10 - 1 being a caveman and 10 being a rocket scientist - I would say religious people are about 2 - in terms of being informed ( you have to take into account that information gathering through the ages has been exponential in magnitude)

I didnt really get where you were going with the last argument.

I think the essence of "faith" is chance-taking - and that that essence is quite relevant, for so much of the universe and its systems are random.

But religious faith is when a pre-defined faith gets packaged into a commodity and sold to what in modern times can only be described as stupid (uninformed) people.

So in other words "faith" is a more general term than religious "faith"