Glad you are smiling (really).  I also didn't say "everyone" felt that way about mystical perceptions--I call your falter and raise you a misunderstood sir.

The difference in what Lulu presented is she is presenting religion (you really want me to post about that?) and I am pointing out that what some people perceive as religious is actually the result of real experience--and that's what distinguishes a Christian from an organized,  Christian religious organization.

I could ask you to detail all the events in your life that led you to embrace your current atheology and go point-by-point through them but it would take a ridiculous amount of time to sort them out--not to mention typing them--if I chose to rebut and ask a defense of each such telling.  Asking for "simple highlights" just opens the door for misquotes and out of context interpretation (which obviously you aren't a fan of). 

When you have a real experience, it moves a little farther away from "amusing". What I do have is lots of time between rendering and debugging and proofing at my desk--hence, I post.

I also lied...I have never seen a flying fish and I know they don't exist.  What sort of fool are you trying to take me for?

The fact that you see "two sides" to this makes my point for me.  It isn't that simple.

 

I do not care what others post. I ignore what I choose to ignore.

Everything is real experience. We have senses which store information in our brain that adds up what we know and believe.

A trolling fool.

 

Regarding your last, apparently I caught one too.

Get tangled up in your own net?

What fish symbol? ....

To the rest...guess whose job it is to determine 'troll'?

Ignore my fish fetish and continue sensible debate....ok? ...

 

I never would have believed God actually existed until I had some very vivid personal spiritual experiences/Encounter back when I was 16. .Before that, nothing could convince me of God's existance so I will not bother trying to convince anyone -- you have to experience Him first before you can ever believe in Him.  Only His Spirit can actually spark any sort of energy within us0 including the energy of faith. 

There's more than science even knows- but science is a good tool- up to a point.

boldyloxx; At what point is it that science becomes ... a bad tool? What circumstances could there be that would require us to ‘bury our head in the sand’? Science is not overstepping its findings or conclusions ... it is being trampled upon by the unscientific religious communities. They would rewrite our history; destroy man's natural ambition to discover and learn for ourselves and to put a moratorium on research and development. I will cast my lot with the sciences thank you very much.

Sinperium #918 ... I understood, hahaha.

I don't know that science becomes a BAD tool, so much as it becomes no tool at all.   When dealing with death, for example.  Try applying the scientific method to what happens after death.   You can form all the hypotheses you want, but good luck collecting experimental data to prove/disprove it.

Looks like the scientific method to me.

Here's an interesting idea. The Christian apocalypse and natural disasters on Earth. One and the same?

Science and Religion are two sides of the same coin and both prone to a form of ignorance. The trouble is the ignorance that comes from Religion is cheat and abundant. 

Faith and the concept of religion are not bad, people are mistaking judeo-christian religions as consistent with religions in general. There are many faiths within the world that do not operate in such a manner which have cultural value. Religion also allows us to view the static mechanics of the world through an artistic lens. To view the concrete through metaphor, which in a way is closer to human thought than science is. 

On a science note, historically it seems that the Druids of Gaul may have been the source of the mathematics we gained from the Greeks. Apparently they were even better. Much can be learned through a sense of homage and wonder to the world and the universe if its done with humility and not with a sense of superiority.

A true scientist never gives up his sense of wonder. 

 

Not so ... at least not so until the Christians actually prove something to someone not in-house ... 2,000 years is more than ample time to accomplish this simple goal ... I am sure humanity doesn't have enough tolerance to live through another 2,000 years of harangue and braggadocio is all. Why don’t they just get out their specific bible and explain all this to the scientists whose sole purpose seems to be to discredit Christianity … so everyone can go to hell, hahaha. I think you are trying to be neutral … but that just doesn’t seem possible in this environment.I am sure we are quite well aware of what happens after death ... at least I am. I guess you are thinking some kind of afterlife or other such nonsense here, who cares. The proof of burden for the claims of the religious communities falls on their shoulders … not ours. Or are you saying this is not all spelled out in someone’s particular ‘book of all knowledge’? Simple enough for anyone to decipher I am sure.

 

Here we go with that Christian dogma talking about religion (things) in general, as if this makes sense. The only thing “in general” in Christendom is an agreement in their specific belief in their specific god … and that is unquestionable. People aren’t mistaking much here I am afraid, they are just confused as to why the true Christians allow the “real reason for religion” to be expressed worldwide by the most corrupt institution on the planet … the RCC with their RCCC … to lead the way for them. The same can be applied to the USG which is another unquestionable organization … if for other reasons.

Two sides of the same coin huh … you either are lacking scientific prowess or you have underestimated religious dogma … these two are not to be found in the same vault … let alone on the same coin.  And further, anyone claiming the title “Christian” is a closet Catholic or an open one … because the whole religion of Christendom is based on the bible from whence Christianity arose. The bible is a complete hoax compiled and self-justified by the RCC in its entirety. Not just the fuzzy warm blurbs to be occasionally found … the whole enchilada or none of it. What science book do you pick up and say, well only half of it is true, the rest is “whatever”, how silly would that be?

You are aware there was a Reformation right?

Many available translations use differing source documents than those using the Vulgate or Septuagint alone which are the primary Catholic translation sources.  Today there are many more versions using corroborating ancient texts and sources going as far back as 1-3 AD in some cases.

Martin Luther did start the Reformation because he believed the scriptures had a definite meaning and place that showed God's intent in the world regarding man.  He also believed God was not fully knowable to mankind and saw the bible as essential to finding what we could know which he believed was primarily the revealing of Jesus as the Christ.  He also believed it was the reader who would himself get the truth from the bible--not just mere study and memorization of only it's literal words and grammar.

This was enough for the Catholics to want to do away with him.

So, we aren't all closet Catholics.  I'm also not a "Lutherite"--I just can understand his view easily as a follower of Christ.