I never thought of that one. If the topic ever comes up in discussion w/ her, I'll have to bring that up. Thanks for the input.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” -Seneca

From what I understand, in the ancient world cultures didn't even refute each other's gods - they figured either they were real too or they were just that cultures name for the same god they believed in if close enough (like Mars/Ares or Jupiter/Zeus. )

According to B.R. Rees in his 1950 seminal text "Popular religion in Graeco-Roman Egypt II. The transition to Christianity" the christian faith ran into huge obstacles in Egypt, at that time considered an intellectual hub of the Roman empire. Greek speaking scholars were amongst the first to point out the objectionably cannibalistic implications and the immature appeal to an awe of magic which characterised the rude theology that then surrounded the early texts in ciculation, including those that now constitute what they call the "new testament". Refutation, at least in intellectual terms, couldn't have come more promptly or more eruditely in the context of the times and the way the sect was spreading its influence.

There are two ironies involved in this episode however. It is generally accepted that the first attempts at christians developing an apologetic theology - one that could be used to justify their faith's tenets to a non-christian and often hostile audience - were honed in response to this refutation. The other irony is that the best arguments they could come up with locally were later outlawed as a heresy by their colleagues closer to the heart of power and whose new membership within that powerful elite meant that they no longer had to defend their religion from intellectual opposition, simply eliminate the intellectuals - even some of their own.

So at least in terms of the "new testamant" your mother is wrong. There were very vocal refutations. They came to nought, not because they were weaker arguments, but because they were erased by their opposition once that opposition had the power through sponsorship of the emperor to enforce it.

Peace and goodwill to all men? You must be fucking joking!

My parents REFUSE to hear what the 'other side of the fence' has to say about anything - they're very closed-minded about it. They only read things w/ a Christian bias to it - for example, we're reading "Letters from a Skeptic" by Gregory & Edward Boyd. The father (the skeptic) has some good questions, but CERTAINLY not all of the appropriate questions were asked. The father (at the end) got converted; but this is a very biased book that doesn't really challenge the 'doubting Thomas'' out there. I'd love to show them Infidels, TalkOrigins, EvilBible, SkepticsAnnotatedBible, GodIsImaginary etc. to them, but they're just too damn stuborn/closed-minded. My theory: 1) they're deathly afraid that the 'other side of the fence' offers some very compelling arguments & they probably feel threatened by it. 2) They're afraid it will jeopardize their faith. 3) they have many xtian friends. So, I'm kind between a rock & a hard place on this one.

This is me (FreeThinker2012). I forgot to sign in - that's why it shows up as "Anonomous / Not Verified". Just an FYI.

"Anonymous" is me (FreeThinker2012). That day, I forgot to sign in, which is why it says "Anonymous / Not Verified". My bad.