It's almost midnight, there are so many holes in this post of yours that I despair of addressing all of them tonight. Maybe I'll just start with the first paragraph and see how it goes.
There certainly is a lot of conjecture in many religions.
As near as I can tell, it's all conjecture. You talk about you and Joe, let's remember that Joe Smith started the Mormon religion and 10 good men testified to the existence of the gold tablets. You buy that? The idea that if a bunch of people agree to something that the agreement makes it truth is nonsense. Everybody used to believe that the world was flat, it was Christian Church doctrine and people were killed for saying otherwise. So much for consensus. The word you're looking for is "empirical" evidence.
With more than 2500 sects of Christians there seems to be little consensus amongst you folks if your consensus gets much beyond the "me and Joe" level. That doesn't make anybody have much faith in your version of the truth or in the Christian "truth" in general. On the other hand, if we take two good Christians from every one of those 2500 churches and give each pair a brick, after they have taken turns (as many as they need to for supporting replication) dropping that brick on each other's heads from a distance of 24 inches, all of them will have gotten the same basic experience and demonstated the Law of Gravity. None of them will argue gravity dogma, will they?
The only part of religion that is not conjecture is truth that has been revealed from God.
Before we even get to God's revealed truth we have to find out if there IS a god. So far there is nothing to support a Christian-style god except a book of plaigarized myths and stories. I realize that there is a deep-down need to believe in god, but let's at least be honest enough to admit that there is not a single shred of empirical proof. I believe in God, but I don't claim to have any proof beyond my own internal experience, and I certainly don't go around telling other people that their internal experience is wrong and mine is right.
Of course, it is pretty hard to differentiate revelation from hallucination.
Truer words were never spoken. If the hallucination is good enough, there is no way to tell it from reality. Look at what Abraham did to his son, Isaac, talk about a good hallucination! He darn near killed his own son on the basis of the word of a vaporous hominid in the sky.
But just because something is hard does not mean that it is not worth pursuing. It does mean that one should be very careful about judging other people's belief systems based on one's own views. And certainly no one should use their religion as an excuse for bigotry and hatred.
It's good to hear you say that, but your attitude towards women makes me question your sincerity. How do you feel about homosexual people being given equal rights?
Every single observation anyone ever makes about the world is a subjective experience that only he and he alone has. When enough people share a subjective experience then it is recognized as reality.
Bull feathers! The world is not flat. If all the people on Earth experienced the world as being flat, that would not make it flat, if everybody agreed that the reality of it was that the world was flat--it STILL wouldn't be flat. Sorry. You can't prove the Bible is true because a bunch of people think so, reality is not a popularity contest and the subjective experience with the most supporters wins and becomes reality. Islam is just as real a Christianity. So is Santeria and Wicca and Jainism. None of them has a single piece of empirical evidence to prove their veracity.
I see that the table in front of me is brown. when Joe, who is with me, agrees then we know that we are seeing reality and not an illusion.
This is how all truth is established. Both in science and in religion. The basis of all truth shared subjective experiences which are all consistent with the other things we know about reality. When enough people see the same thing then the confidence we have in it's reality increases. Certainly more than just Joe and I have seen brown tables and as a result I trust my senses not only when Joe is with me but also when I am alone.
When enough people see the same thing then the confidence we have in it's reality increases.
Twaddle, see above
So how do you know if there is a God or not? First you have a subjective experience in which you experience god. Then you confirm it against other people's experiences and everything we know about reality. If you don't first have this experience and you choose to believe in God anyway then you are trusting the word of others who have told you about God. Make sure that they are trustworthy.
Were the 10 men who swore for the veracity of Joe Smith trustworthy? How exactly does one determine trustworthyness?
The Bible tells us that if a person claims to have a revelation from God that he must pass a test to be trusted. 1) he must never ever be wrong 2) he must never ever contradict what other prophets have told us about God. Often they must offer signs to testify about the reality of their subjective experience.
Many prophets have predicted future events. We have seen these events come to pass. This is a sign.
More of the same here, nothing but baseless statements.
Many have tried to find falsehoods in the Bible. And while many claim that they are numerous there has not been one yet that holds enough water to sway intelligent Christians. If there were then we would see a mass exodus of people abandoning Christianity - which we do not see.
There are whole websites devoted to detailing the mistakes, contradictions, and nonsense in the Bible. If Adam and Eve were the first people, to whom did Cain turn to find a wife after he slew Abel? The truth here is that you will not look at the contradictions in the Bible because you believe and don't want your belief shaken. Invincible ignorance it's called.
Many prophets have performed miracles strong enough to convince the people who have actually witnessed them. Skeptics today doubt the miracles because they themselves have never seen one. But we all know that not seeing something is not proof that it does not exist.
Not seeing something doesn't mean that it DOES exist either. You are relying on stories told by people who died thousands of years ago, their stories were stolen by other people and collected in a book. Somebody in a position of authority told you the book was the Word of God and you decided to believe them. End of story. No proof, not a single bit.
Read Old Testament
