fundamental suppositions of God that are absurd

[_Themis]

What do the numbers mean to you? I don't view it as a vote, if that's what you're implying. The fact is that people in many different religions pray to find which religion is the most correct and many people get many different answers. Are you implying that because the most identified religion was Mormonism, then that must be the right answer? What do you make of the other answers? Are they all wrong? And how do you know?

Mormonism tends to teach the idea of one true church you just don't find in other religions. They focus on it where others religions don't. To many Christians and people of other religions, the idea of one true church is foreign to them. So praying to God to ask about which religion is true is not something most would do. With Mormons they stress praying and asking God if the Mormon church is true to a fault, so I would be surprised if you didn't get more Mormons with this kind of true church mentality compared to other religions.

[_ludwigm]

I am pointing out that copying something from another site and manicuring the copied text is inappropriate.

All other putting false constructions on my words are unnecessary.

[_Themis]

DrW, how have you come to the conclusion that any God is such a product?

How did you come to the idea that some Gods are real? You have admitted to no real evidence, and that you believe only because you don't like the idea of a universe with no God. You have made assumptions from the beginning to end. It's pointless and in the end you believe what ever you like. I suggest Dr. W is being reasonable and not believing things for which there is a major lack of evidence. Why would this assumed Good God not provide him with the necessary knowledge he exists and what he wants?

[_LookingLooking]

I am pointing out that copying something from another site and manicuring the copied text is inappropriate.

All other putting false constructions on my words are unnecessary.

Again, what is the relevance of the numbers? To me, they don't seem to be relevant, and so I didn't include them. Please tell me what relevance they have if you think they are relevant.

[_SteelHead]

Kevin,
The question that is being begged is that there is a god, and that he hears and answers prayers. It is an assumption of your proposed methodology, but it has not been established. The initial premises being; that god exists and that he hears and answers prayers. This premise has not been established, hence the methodology is still an exercise in question begging.

[_Sethbag]

Some one (I don't remember who) once said (paraphrasing, not an exact quote) that if someone believes you made them think, they will praise you and be grateful to you forever, but if you actually do get them to think, they will never forgive you. I think this is too often true of many.

This is awesome! Thanks for posting it, Gunnar.

[_Sethbag]

God is the personification of our own individual senses of right and wrong.

This is probably the single truest thing you've ever posted on this board, Kevin, though I'm not convinced you really understand why.

[_ludwigm]

I am pointing out that copying something from another site and manicuring the copied text is inappropriate.

All other putting false constructions on my words are unnecessary.

Again, what is the relevance of the numbers? To me, they don't seem to be relevant, and so I didn't include them. Please tell me what relevance they have if you think they are relevant.

what is the relevance of the numbers? To me, they don't seem to be relevant

Because you can not count on your fingers.
The link you provided says:
1. ------------------------
"114 usable responses were collected. 82% of the respondents reported receiving an answer"
82% of 114 is 93,48. Is it 93 or 94?
Does it make sense using % instead of numbers?

That 93 or 94 listed as 81 (please add the numbers after denominations...)
This inconsistency (81 vs 93/94) makes the whole poll questionable.

2.---------------------------
19 of 81 (or 93 or 94) say catholicism, 22 of same amount say Mormonism.
As other numbers say 1 to 5 (12 of them are unique...) so the number 19 and 22 IS relevant, at least it says something about the sampling environment.

I bet the same poll would show very different result in Europe (where Mormonism is practically unknown, and many country are mostly protestant) or in Iran or Iraq, Japan or Indonesia...

[_Sethbag]

But the question is not, is Jesus suffering for our sins just? The question is, when we're in the process of tormenting ourselves for our sins, can we believe that Jesus suffered and died for something? And could it be for our sins? And might the fact that He suffered and died for our sins distract us from us tormenting ourselves? Never mind what justice actually requires.

If Jesus' agony can't contribute to an end of our suffering, then what can?

How about the realization that such self-flagellation because one masturbated as a teen or whatever is simply unnecessary in the first place?

There, problem solved. The murder of Jesus completely not necessary.

What helps me sleep at night when I trespass against my neighbor is to realize that I've done so, and to receive that neighbor's forgiveness. I don't also require the "comfort" of knowing that a Palestinian end-times preacher in the year 33 A.D. was tortured and executed by the Romans.

What's needed to cure the self-torment that comes from the Christian teachings re: sin is not more Christianity.

[_ludwigm]

I don't also require the "comfort" of knowing that a Palestinian end-times preacher in the year 33 A.D. was tortured and executed by the Romans.

A simplistic but adequate description of christianity - even the special event and the date are doubtful.

Anyway, it is a working hypothesis...