The hindu religion has kept its thematic integrity (whatever that means) for longer than Christianity has.

And are you seriously silly enough to believe that there were talking snakes, talking donkeys and people that walked on water? Or is it more likely that there was some embellishment going on? C'mon...now who's being gullible

I would be interested to know what horrid event happened in your life that caused you to give up and "accept" Jesus as your "savior". It is such a tragic and sorry thing that certain people react to adversity by following the Jesus formula. I hope the comfort is worth the sacrifice, but of course I know it's not.

I used to interview "saved" people on the street, concentrating on their pasts, looking for the moment in time when they intellectually collapsed. And usually, through gentle but relentless probing, I could get them to cry (or get very close) by eliciting recall of the horror that sent them into intellectual exile. I was young and a bit cruel I must admit, but in almost every case, "saved" people had a personal apocalypse of some kind that led them to flee reason and action for the comfort of illusory love and eternal compassion.

I stopped doing that after some time when I realized that these people were usually very nice and hurting very badly, and my actions could never lead to the correct end game: renouncing the folly of Christ and reconvening with reality.

So if you do not want to relate what screwed up happenstance led to your collapse, I completely understand. But I know, and you know, there was something that left your intellect in the shambles that you exhibit in so many of your posts.

I do not believe it is ever too late to get rid of the Jesus and the Bible nonsense and return to reality and what actually exists. But the path is often psychologically so tough that most just simply choose the mythology, preferring idle comfort to the endless challenge of a correct, rational life.

This is the best you can do?

Not answer the question but present an alternative that you haven't even investigated yourself but use to raise as an objection only?

Sorry, your above interviews are hearsay and meaningless to me.

When I accepted Jesus I wasn't at a desperate time in my life at all. Why would you buy into that stereotype? Does it please you?

Try not to over generalize so much. People are going to tear you up all over this board for it.

I'm demonstrating that just because you assert something is true doesn't make it so because others assert outlandish claims as well. Just answer the questions, do you believe in talking snakes, talking donkeys and walking on water? Here, I'll make it easier, so you can just quote this and add yes/no to the right of the statement:

• Did the creation take six literal days?
• Was there a talking snake?
• Was there a talking donkey?
• Did Noah take two of every animal on his boat?
• Did Moses turn a stick into a serpent?
• Did Jesus walk on water?
• Did Jesus rise from the dead?

No we're not going to let you off the hook by raising questions when you didn't explain how people kept up a 1500 year hoax.

You atheists are the ones who believe in the telephone game. How come it didn't apply to the scriptures, huh?

How come you never investigate just how strong Middle Eastern Oral tradition is but confuse it with parlor games?

They've kept up the "hoax" the same way Hinduism has kept it up for 4000 years. People have strong faith in their (false) beliefs, so they keep propagating them.

Are you really not going to answer the questions? I would think your faith is strong enough to stand it, but maybe not. Prove me wrong.

• Did the creation take six literal days?
• Was there a talking snake?
• Was there a talking donkey?
• Did Noah take two of every animal on his boat?
• Did Moses turn a stick into a serpent?
• Did Jesus walk on water?
• Did Jesus rise from the dead?

That's a very vague reply.

You didn't explain the continuity question at all. I suppose the telephone game only applies when you want it to.

I won't be back for several days, if ever, for errands I have to do.

Tc.

It wasn't vague, it was succinct. I simply set up a parallel between Hinduism and Christianity to show you that just because a myth has been around for a long time has almost nothing to do with whether that myth is true or not.

And you're really running away from the questions? I thought your faith was stronger than that.

• Did the creation take six literal days?
• Was there a talking snake?
• Was there a talking donkey?
• Did Noah take two of every animal on his boat?
• Did Moses turn a stick into a serpent?
• Did Jesus walk on water?
• Did Jesus rise from the dead?

Well ouch, I guess I hit a nerve. You sound very defensive and angry, and a touch hysterical, over the implication that your psychological collapse was indeed catalyzed by a personal trauma of some kind. I think we both know that this is true, and I can tell by your agitated demeanor that it is something you want to avoid and or forget.

However, be warned. The Jesus methodology of dealing with profound personal catastrophe ultimately fails. Simply because it has no basis in reality. There are better ways to deal with a personal chasm, but they do require perceiving the World as it is, not how you wish it to be.

There is no Splendour in renouncing reality.

I haven't studied Hinduism so I'm not going to nonchalantly accept your comparison. I read once that the Brahmins may have been connected to Abraham though. Note the names similarity: Brahmin/Abraham.

As for the rest of the questions, I don't have the time to follow up so that's it for the day.

Given that Hinduism is the world's oldest known religion (according to historical records), it's more likely that Abraham was copied from the Brahmins than the other way around.

...and you don't have time for seven words? Just a yes or no next to each question will suffice!

You didn't hit a nerve at all.

I have the fatal flaw or is it a virtue of usually telling the unvarnished truth.

You really ought to think twice about playing armchair psychiatrist y'know. Just because Dawkins uses the cute word "delusion" in one of his titles doesn't make him a psychiatrist. He's an evolutionary biologist...dare I say posing like he's a psychiatrist. I guess if you're rhetoric is persuasive enough people will believe anything. But I looked it up once and faith is one of the things the psychiatric community doesn't classify as a delusion.

It's rather absurd to insist on people having mental problems when they are simply reading witness accounts transcended via oral tradition which is nothing like the telephone game.

Have you ever read a sworn statement? They use them as evidence in a court of law.

There could be a bias when you read evidence but there doesn't have to be a mental defect.

That's slander and wishful thinking on Dawkins part. I guess he's full of himself.

Okay Splendour, you've definitely had enough time to answer yes or no to the questions!

I'm not saying they have mental problems. Just like I wouldn't say the believers of Sai Baba (a known fraud) have mental problems.

Show me where supernatural testimony has been entered in as evidence.

Exactly, and you have a bias when it comes to evidence for Christianity, but not for other religions. You simply hand waive off 'miracles' from other religions.

It's not slander if it's true.

Delusion: An idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality