[BluffTHIS!]

I have NotReady in other threads stating that he doesn't expect to find perfection of doctrine in any denomination, although he can't demonstrate logical contradictions in my views. And I have OOO and udon'tknowmickey stating that it is reasonable to believe that God doesn't care if His divine messages are transmitted down to our time free of error. Do you all not realize the implications of this? You are playing right into the hands of those who deny the truth of Christianity by claiming that Jesus didn't really exist or that even if he did then those who wrote about him made up a lot of it, and that even after that the doctrines based upon what he said are not correct interpretations of scripture even given that it is true.

When you profess faith in any belief system, whether religious, mathematical or scientific, you start out with certain premises or axioms which by definition cannot be proved to certainty, but the evidence for same is enough for you, espcially if you believe you possess personal evidence that tips the scales, although which would usually not be credible to others. How improbable those axioms might be determines how seriously non-believers are willing to take that system. In other words, you have to avoid extreme far-fetchedness. After that you derive derivative theorems or doctrines which should not conflict logically either among themselves or with the axioms. Regarding matters of religion, this is a matter of spiritual as well as intellectual integrity.

Anyone willing to accept such contradictions can claim no better thinking than someone who believes in astrology. Logic is a part of the sphere of knowledge with strong mathematical foundations. To refuse to acknowledge or to accept logical contradictions is no different than maintaining that the earth is flat or that 3^2 really does not equal 9. I give tons more respect to the intellectually honest views of atheists and agnostics like andy or David, than I do to any Christian who either can't formulate logically correct views, denies logical implications, or worse yet can't even see them.

All of this is not proof in and of itself that my particular religious beliefs, i.e. catholocism, are true. Many of you may not possess the theological knowledge to rebut various points I make to as great a degree as a theology professor in a protestant seminary would be able to. A good analogy for this is to look at these theological arguements, what we call apologetics in my church, as the various lines in a book of chess openings. Just because you know only 1/2 the line doesn't make me correct since others with greater knowledge could take it further even if they couldn't actually refute my views. But if you can't even make logical arguments with fellow Christians, then you have no hope of ever persuading thinking non-believers.