Replies

DannyTn: “What should a religion do if it is true? It should provide practical instruction for man as to how to live and it should tell him how he relates to god(s) and the world, and what his purpose is.”

I believe in Jack Hayes, the one true god of Texas. The gospel of Jack can be found in the compendium of Texas statutes as codified by Vernon’s. These statutes tell me everything from which side of the road I can drive on to the nature of the paperwork necessary to set up an S corporation. Thus, they “provide practical instruction for man as to how to live.” The statutes also tell me that if I disobey Jack by violating his statutes, I will be subject to quite specific penalties. Thus, “they tell me how I relate to [Jack] and the world.” Finally, I view it as self-evident that my purpose in life is to obey Jack and the Texas statutes (coupled with the very purposeful goal of avoiding Huntsville prison at all costs).

DannyTn: "One way is to divide the religions is between meaning and meaninglessness. Only those belief systems which regard the world, man and the cosmos as real both in their existence and purpose can provide meaning for man.”

As a practical matter, if you view Jack and the Texas statutes as meaningless, you are going to have some serious problems. Jack and the Texas statutes also regard the world, the cosmos, and me as quite real, as evidenced by their presumption that I (and the balance of the world known as Texas) are subject to their regulation. They also regard the purpose of the world, the cosmos, and me in a pretty straightforward way -- to follow the statutes and render Texas an orderly place, or pay the price.

DannyTn: “Only those belief systems which take man's sinfulness seriously can hope to provide a satisfying answer.”

Believe me, Jack and the Texas statutes take sinfulness seriously. The execution rate in Texas is nothing to sneeze at.

DannyTn: “To say that I shouldn't analyze religions according to expectations is ridiculous.”

I agree. And my expectations are that if I obey the Texas statutes, Jack will for the most part leave me the heck alone (which in the end is all we believers in Jack and the Texas statutes really want).

I am of course being facetious. But, as you can see, the religion of Jack and the Texas statutes satisfies most of you supposed criteria for gauging the truth of a religious belief.

Left unaddressed are your perfectly non-objective and evidence-free beliefs in “eternal life” and “salvation by acceptance of Christ.” I happen to believe both of these as well, but I know they cannot be “proven” in any way whatsoever, and they certainly cannot be “proven” by a method that presumes otherwise universally accepted rules of civilization to be uniquely Christian in origin or practice.