[Lestat]

Doug is explaining the problem I had with 50/50 much better than I was. At least I don't feel so dumb now for being the only person who was aghast at 50/50. -lol

It goes back to what I asked earlier. How can a blind man be so sure there is a wall in front of him and not a pizza, or a tractor, or any other of the (almost) infinite things whih migh exist in front of him?

To answer your question, THIS is the way an atheist view things (at least I do). You have to start with one BIG assumption! And even in the very unlikely event the first assumption is right, you now have to base many MORE untold assumptions off the first one, to get down to precisely any one particular version of God and religion being correct.

Perhaps it this would be better - and I don't think I've seen this yet and would be very interested to- ...

Start from scratch. Take nothing for granted. Then show what steps you've taken to logically conclude first... Any God, Then... YOUR version of God. List them as steps.

I'm really hoping this isn't too much of an onus on you. I'm seriously interested in knowing the process or series of steps one takes to make the logical conjecture that his or her religion must be the correct one to believe, as opposed to some other religion, or none at all.

I doubt you'll do this since you won't likely get anything out of it, but perhaps aggravation from those trying to poke holes in your logic. Or even if you could PM me with a short synopsis, I'd be really interested. And please understand that I'm NOT interested in making fun of you or your logic, but genuinely understanding it. This would no doubt mean that I'd have some questions if you're up to it.

I really think this is where it would need to start. A theist giving accounting for his beliefs (even though you don't owe any explanations). It is futile to have an atheist start. That would be like you having to prove to me there is not a blow up doll in your closet right now. That couldn't get off to a good start.