What is faith? Really?

[Animavore]

Interesting tidbit, do you remember where you found it?

Yes. Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman. I recommend all his books in general. He's probably one of the best and most honest NT biblical scholars out there (he's agnostic). He's the go-to guy when new scrolls (like the recent Gospel of Judas) are found.

[Seth]

The reason Nicodemus makes this mistake is because in Greek there is a play on words. The Greek word anothen means 'from above' and 'born again' and it is this first usage that Jesus uses. Nicodemus mistakes it for the second meaning.
The problem is if this conversation happened it would've happened in Aramaic or even Hebrew where such a mistake is impossible. Ergo this coversation could never have happened. Conversely, Born Again Christianity is based on a lie

And you know that Jesus used that Greek word how, exactly?

If Jesus used Aramaic or Hebrew there would be no ambiguity and Jesus would have meant exactly what he said.

You're straining at gnats in you obsession with deriding something that according to your religion you don't believe in.

Why is that?

[Brian Peacock]

Having a view about Christianity is contingent on belief now?

[Seth]

Having a view about Christianity is contingent on belief now?

No, having a belief about anything may qualify as the practice of religion if that belief and practice meet any of the definitions of "religion," which it appears to me is the case with Animavore.

Clearly the assertions made in the post demonstrate a belief not founded in logic, reason or fact, and the fervor with which they were made indicates that this is "something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience", which is one of the dictionary definitions of "religion."

[Svartalf]

I believe that all three Book religion nebulae are a bunch of absurdities.

[Brian Peacock]

Having a view about Christianity is contingent on belief now?

No, having a belief about anything may qualify as the practice of religion if that belief and practice meet any of the definitions of "religion," which it appears to me is the case with Animavore.

Clearly the assertions made in the post demonstrate a belief not founded in logic, reason or fact, and the fervor with which they were made indicates that this is "something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience", which is one of the dictionary definitions of "religion."

I tell you what I believe - I believe you're taking the piss. That's a broad definition of religion for sure, one so broad in fact that any considered act becomes a religious practice and makes everyone an autotheist at least. Of course, the faithful have always insisted that religion is a necessary pre-condition to virtue, "You can't be good without a godling Timmy", so that's hardly surprising, but now it seems just taking an ethical view is a religion in and of itself.

Bonkers. Why do we have to measure ourselves against a religious yardstick or declare the very fact of our existence a religious act?

Throwing in words like 'fact', 'reason', and 'logic', and saying someone is 'fervent', doesn't just make what you said factual, reasonable, or logical. It doesn't mean anyone should pay special attention to your analysis of a random stranger on the internet either. I'd be happy to discuss this, but If you'd like me to take this seriously I'd be grateful if you could at least show your working out.

[Brian Peacock]

I believe that all three Book religion nebulae are a bunch of absurdities.

Congratulations, you have just become a Pope!

Strum my holy banjo!

[Svartalf]

I prefer playing the harp, and hate dressing in white

[rainbow]

I believe that all three Book religion nebulae are a bunch of absurdities.

You speak as if absurdity is a bad thing.

If this is so, explain stinky cheese.

[Svartalf]

It doesn't taste like it smells

[Brian Peacock]

And would you say that you are fervent about that?

[Svartalf]

I prefer the milder ones, being a moderate in many things.

[Brian Peacock]

A religion of cheese can be the only true faith.

[Svartalf]

Theophagy? again?

[Seth]

Having a view about Christianity is contingent on belief now?

No, having a belief about anything may qualify as the practice of religion if that belief and practice meet any of the definitions of "religion," which it appears to me is the case with Animavore.

Clearly the assertions made in the post demonstrate a belief not founded in logic, reason or fact, and the fervor with which they were made indicates that this is "something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience", which is one of the dictionary definitions of "religion."

I tell you what I believe - I believe you're taking the piss.

Not even a little tiny bit. I'm dead serious. It is my observation that almost all self-professed Atheists I've ever encountered present their anti-theist arguments as both a matter of faith and as a fervent and deeply-held personal set of beliefs and practices that are no more based in science, logic or reason than any other irrational set of beliefs and practices. That is why sites like RDF and RatSkep even exist. The predominant article of faith I see pervading the vast majority of such dialog consists of attacks on religion that are every bit as foaming-at-the-mouth rabidly anti-theist as any of the rabidly foaming-at-the-mouth anti-atheist/fundamentalist theistic religious rhetoric.

That's a broad definition of religion for sure, one so broad in fact that any considered act becomes a religious practice and makes everyone an autotheist at least.

You fail to distinguish between theism and religion. We're talking about religion here, not theism.

Of course, the faithful have always insisted that religion is a necessary pre-condition to virtue, "You can't be good without a godling Timmy", so that's hardly surprising, but now it seems just taking an ethical view is a religion in and of itself.

Once again you conflate religion and theism inappropriately. Theism is a particular subset of WHAT one believes and practices. Religion describes HOW people undertake a particular set of beliefs or practices.

Bonkers. Why do we have to measure ourselves against a religious yardstick or declare the very fact of our existence a religious act?

Because that's the definition of religion, good sir.

Throwing in words like 'fact', 'reason', and 'logic', and saying someone is 'fervent', doesn't just make what you said factual, reasonable, or logical. It doesn't mean anyone should pay special attention to your analysis of a random stranger on the internet either. I'd be happy to discuss this, but If you'd like me to take this seriously I'd be grateful if you could at least show your working out.

I believe I just did. The failure to distinguish logically and rationally between theism and religion, and the constant practice of conflating and confusing the two things is the root of your error.