Good, finally something that makes sense. No need to deny the correlation, as you were trying to do. People are free to draw their own conclusions from such correlation. Like I said,
Attack the messenger, not the message? I don't know who the article was intended. This is a website of a Jesuit university. The article was published in a Jesuit journal. I know Jesuits are liberals. But do you think that they would intentionally attack Christian beliefs? For the glory of God?
LOL, finally something that makes sense? I was trying to deny the correlation? [insert animated slapping/shaking head emoticon] I was toiling with the implication of the correlation. (read conclusion drawn from it.) You can't deny something that is in plain sight. A correlation is a correlation. Like an assertion is an assertion. Nothing more, nothing less. But if you recall, LKH was attempting to use the correlation to support his contention. And in a somewhat subtle way, the author(s) of the study were attempting to doing the same but with the requisite provisos. And yes people are free to draw their own conclusions but is it wrong of me to point out that they WILL be drawing improper, illogical and incomplete conclusions based on the half-witted nature of the statistical analysis presented? And I CAN say that it's half-witted because it is a demonstrably flawed process used. But don't take my word for it, you can take the author's word. He/They know it is and that those who understand statistics won't be fooled in the least so for them it's an entertaining, albeit, interesting correlation. Hence, "a first look."
Now you're trying too hard. I'm simply responding to your posts. One of which starts as "You obviously didn't read..." I felt the need to make sure that you knew that I did in fact read it in its entirety. That's ok. I have a very strong suspicion. Look up the Author's background. You'll find it interesting. But the intention is in the wording of the article even if you didn't know his background. His background only underscores his intention. If there was actual statistical merit in the study, his background would be irrelevant. A good study is a good study no matter who did it. But when something is amiss, knowing background sometimes helps to explain the "why" of it. Mmm, I'm going to have to say, "yes." Think about it. The Jesuits are closer to Gnosticism than they are to Christianity. Always have been to some degree or another. They've been in theological conflict with the RCC for a long while. And let's not forget that Jesuits are keen on casuistry. That is to say, argumentation that is specious or excessively subtle and intended to be misleading. Since you had the first rebuttal, per se, last word is yours.
Proof #26 - Notice that the Bible's author is not "all-knowing" Why, when you read the Bible, are you not left in awe? For example, look though this small collection of Bible verses: Deut 25:11-12 Genesis 38:8-10 Deut 21:18-21 Ex 35:2 Lev 20:13 Isaiah 13:13-16 Exodus 21:20-21 1 Tim 2:11-12 Col 3:22-23 Luke 14:26 Deut 22:13-21 Isaiah 40:8 These verses feel like utter nonsense, don't they? We can find thousands of verses like these in the Bible. So we are forced to ask a question: Why doesn't a book written by God leave you with a sense of wonder and amazement? If you are reading a book written by the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving creator of the universe, wouldn't you expect to be stunned by the brilliance, the clarity and the wisdom of the author? Would you not expect each new page to intoxicate you with its incredible prose and its spectacular insight? Instead, opening the Bible inevitably creates a feeling of dumbfoundment. Have you ever noticed that? Instead of brilliance, much of the Bible contains nonsense. Several of the topics of the previous proofs, for example where we discussed the Bible's advocacy of slavery, are excellent examples. But they are just the tip of the iceberg. You can open the Bible to almost any page and find nonsense instead of wisdom. Why, in other words, is the Bible so useless? Why does the author of the Bible, who is supposed to be God, who is supposed to be all-knowing, know so little? Why is the knowledge of the author limited to the knowledge of the primitive men who wrote the book? If you think about what you are reading in the Bible in the context of an all-knowing God who supposedly wrote it, none of it makes any sense. But if you think about the Bible as being a book written by primitive men like you would find in the remote regions of Afghanistan today, it makes complete sense. The reason is because God is imaginary. "God" had nothing to do with the Bible. The Bible was written by primitive men, many of who were obviously insane.
Proof #27 - Think about life after death If you are a Christian, then Jesus promises that your soul will have everlasting life. In John 3:16 the Bible says: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." All that you have to do is believe in Jesus and your soul gets to go to heaven. But have you ever really thought about your soul? Have you ever thought about how the afterlife would work? Which life forms get an afterlife and which do not? Start with a bacterium. Does it have a soul and does it get an afterlife? A bacterium is a cell membrane filled with a variety of molecules. These molecules react together in different ways to create what we call life. Although all of these molecules are reacting in fascinating, interlocking ways, they are still nothing more than chemicals reacting. The "miracle of life" is no miracle -- it is a big chemical reaction. When those reactions stop, the cell is dead. Now here is the question: When the bacterium dies, does it get an afterlife? There are not many people in the United States who believe that bacteria go to heaven. The Bible does not talk about heaven being filled with all the disease, putrefaction and pestilence that bacteria cause. And what, exactly, would go to heaven? Do all of the bacterium's molecules get transported to another dimension so that they can keep reacting? If that were happening, there would be thousands of tons of chemicals leaving earth every day. Clearly there is no afterlife for bacteria cells. What about mosquitoes? A mosquito is much more complex than a bacterium cell. For one thing, a mosquito is a multi-cellular insect with amazing capabilities. But if you look at each cell in a mosquito, it is very much like a bacterium in its basic functioning. Do mosquitoes get an afterlife? Clearly not. Think of how many mosquitoes have lived and died over the course of millions of years. No one imagines heaven being full of septillions of everlasting mosquitoes. There is also the problem that we saw with bacteria -- the only way for a mosquito to go to heaven would be to somehow transport all the chemicals in a mosquito from earth to heaven. What about mice? They are no different from mosquitoes. Mice are multicellular organisms, but each cell is a little chemical factory very much like a bacterium. Dogs? Ditto. Chimps? Ditto. So what about humans? The human body is nothing but a set of chemical reactions. The chemical reactions powering a human life are no different from the reactions powering the life of a bacterium, a mosquito, a mouse, a dog or a chimp. When a human being dies, the chemical reactions stop. There is no "soul" mixed in with the chemicals, just like there is no soul in a bacterium, a mosquito, a mouse, a dog or a chimp. Why would there be an afterlife for the chemicals that make up a human body? The whole notion of your "soul" is completely imaginary. The concept of a "soul" has been invented by religion because many people have trouble facing their own mortality. It makes people feel better, but the concept is a complete fabrication. It is when you think about the chemical reactions powering your life and your brain that you realize how completely imaginary your "soul" truly is. And at that point, everything about religion comes unraveled. Think back to when you were a kid and you realized that Santa was imaginary. As soon as you knew it, it was obvious. Reindeer cannot fly. A man cannot slide down chimneys. There is no way for one little sleigh to carry all the toys for all the kids in the world. Etc. It is obvious that Santa is make believe. In the same way, it is obvious that human beings are big, walking chemical reactions (see this article for a description of how the reactions work)http://www.howstuffworks.com/cell.htm/printable. Your "soul" is make believe just like Santa. When the chemical reactions cease, you die. That is the end of it. Knowing this, you can see that everything about religion is imaginary. God, the Bible, Jesus, the resurrection, prayer, the Ten Commandments, the creation story, your soul, everlasting life, heaven... every bit of it is the product of human imagination. The same goes for Allah, the Koran and so on. As a species we have believed all of this religious dogma for centuries, and most of us believe it today to some degree. And yet... it is all fiction. Today's "God" is just as fictional as were the gods of the Egyptians, the Romans and the Aztecs.
Proof #28 - Notice how many gods you reject There are literally thousands of religions being practiced today. Here are 20 of the most popular, along with an estimate of the number of followers: Christianity: 2.1 billion Islam: 1.3 billion Hinduism: 900 million Chinese traditional religion: 394 million Buddhism: 376 million African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million Sikhism: 23 million Juche: 19 million Spiritism: 15 million Judaism: 14 million Baha'i: 7 million Jainism: 4.2 million Shinto: 4 million Cao Dai: 4 million Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million Tenrikyo: 2 million Neo-Paganism: 1 million Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand Rastafarianism: 600 thousand Scientology: 500 thousand [Source: Encyclopedia Britannica] If you believe in God, you have chosen to reject Allah, Vishnu, Budda, Waheguru and all of the thousands of other gods that other people worship today. It is quite likely that you rejected these other gods without ever looking into their religions or reading their books. You simply absorbed the dominant faith in your home or in the society you grew up in. In the same way, the followers of all these other religions have chosen to reject God. You think their gods are imaginary, and they think your God is imaginary. In other words, each religious person on earth today arbitrarily rejects thousands of gods as imaginary, many of which he/she has never even heard of, and arbitrarily chooses to "believe" in one of them. The following quote from Stephen F. Roberts sums up the situation very nicely: "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." A rational person rejects all human gods equally, because all of them are equally imaginary. How do we know that they are imaginary? Simply imagine that one of them is real. If one of these thousands of gods were actually real, then his followers would be experiencing real, undeniable benefits. These benefits would be obvious to everyone. The followers of a true god would pray, and their prayers would be answered. The followers of a true god would therefore live longer, have fewer diseases, have lots more money, etc. There would be thousands of statistical markers surrounding the followers of a true god. Everyone would notice all of these benefits, and they would gravitate toward this true god. And thus, over the course of several centuries, everyone would be aligned on the one true god. All the other false gods would have fallen by the wayside long ago, and there would be only one religion under the one true god. When we look at our world today, we see nothing like that. There are two billion Christians AND there are more than one billion Muslims, and their religions are mutually exclusive. There are thousands of other religions. When you analyse any of them, they all show a remarkable similarity -- there is zero evidence that any of these gods exist. That is how we know that they are all imaginary.
Proof #29 - Think about Communion Because Christians have been participating in the communion rite for many years, they tend to forget just how bizarre this ritual is. The whole idea of "eating Jesus' body" and "drinking his blood" is grotesque in the extreme. Have you ever wondered where this ritual came from, or why billions of people would participate in a ritual that is this bizarre? First, let's look at the part of the Bible that prescribes the ritual. You find it in Mark, Chapter 14: And as they were eating, he took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take; this is my body." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. There are a few lines in Luke chapter 22 that are nearly identical. Jesus gets far more graphic, however, in John chapter 6:53-55: So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. To any normal person, this sounds very much like the script of a gruesome horror film. It sounds like some sort of revolting satanic ritual. It definitely does not sound like the words of the all-loving creator of the universe. Imagine that you are a normal person, and you have never been exposed to Christianity before. Now imagine that a Christian comes up to you and quotes John 6:53. Any normal adult would rightfully assume the Christian to be insane. Thus, you never see a bumper sticker that says "John 6:53." However, the assumption is accurate. The dictionary describes cannibalism in the following way: The usually ritualistic eating of human flesh by a human being What Jesus is demanding is cannibalism. What does your common sense tell you about all of this? What we are talking about here is cannibalism, and what Christians are doing looks exactly like a pagan/satanic ritual. If you are a Christian, the two questions you may be asking yourself right now are: Why in the world am I, as a sane individual, participating in ritualistic cannibalism? How in the world did I stoop to this point? Why would an all-powerful, all-loving God demand that I do this? What sort of God am I worshipping? The source of the ritual If you are curious, here is why Christianity contains this bizarre ritual. It is not the case that an all-powerful God in heaven demands this behavior. All of the rituals in Christianity are completely man-made. Christianity is a snow ball that rolled over a dozen pagan religions. As the snowball grew, it freely attached pagan rituals in order to be more palatable to converts. The process is described succinctly and accurately in the book "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown. The book offers these two accounts of the acretion process: "The vestiges of pagan religion in Christian symbology are undeniable. Egyptian sun disks became the halos of Catholic saints. Pictograms of Isis nursing her miraculously conceived son Horus became the blueprint for our modern images of the Virgin Mary nursing Baby Jesus. And virtually all the elements of the Catholic ritual - the miter, the altar, the doxology, and communion, the act of "God-eating" - were taken directly from earlier pagan mystery religions." "Nothing in Christianity is original. The pre-Christian God Mithras - called the Son of God and the Light of the World - was born on December 25, died was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days. By the way, December 25 is also the birthday or Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus. The newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Even Christianity's weekly holy day was stolen from the pagans." To any normal person, the practice of communion is one of the most bizarre things that Christians do. Jesus' cannibalistic tendencies offer explicit evidence that Jesus is not God. When you research it historically, you realize that Jesus was a human being like any other. The mythology of his birth, life and death are pagan stories that are all man-made because God is imaginary.
So true. Others: The 10 commandments are from the Egyptian Book of the Dead, except the one that states there is only one God. The story of Noah's flood is either from the epic of Gilgamesh or older stories. The Garden of Eden (actually "Edin"meaning flat plain) is likely a Sumer story of a region in Iran. It is not likely original to the 3 religions of Abraham. Pharaoh Akhenaten held the belief of monotheism and may have been the inspiration for all that followed. More likely Zoroaster was the greatest influence on monotheism and influenced almost all subsequent revealed religions. The list gets very long. Seneca âReligion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.â
I checked one verse genesis 40:8 -- what is strange about Isa 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever. -------------------------- I also then read you nonsense about communion. You seem to imply that the communion was grafted in by church leaders from pagan religions. Is that the best you can do? Is it your contention that communion came about at a later date and not practiced by the early chruch? Or are you saying Jesus instituted a pagan practice. If you claim the former. You have to contend with many facts which show that the early church parcticed communion from the get go, and that early Christians had to hold mass in secret to avoid being arrested by authorities for being cannibals. You also have to deal witht he fact that both Acts and Corinthians speak of communion, the didache does, Pliny, St. Justion, Tertullian and many others. And as far as it not being orignal. I Many understand that that the last supper and communion were foreshadowed by the Israelists thousands of years before. Moses told them to put the blood of the lamb on the top and the sides of the door jam (the sign of the cross) and then eat the unblemished lamb. so that death would passover. I too go to communion knowing that because I am doing in faith what jesus told me to do in John chapter 6, and because I discern the body when I receive communion (Corinthinans) I will have eternal life.