Christianity consists of many denominations under a single heading of "Christian" (i.e. belief in Jesus as the model of behavior consistent with humanity's escape from death. aka: Grace or salvation.)
Within the heading of Christian belief there are dissonances or differences which we will call "noise".
The amount of noise is unknown compared to an ideal or original message signal from God.
Since all Christians base their belief on a fixed prior (existence of the bible)and that is the STANDARD by which harmony is measured, how can the amount of "noise" be determined which is the corruption of the message when compared to the accuracy of belief?
A SIGNAL is transmitted which we will call S (The message of God is the SIGNAL as contained in the bible.)
A MESSAGE is received which we will call R (Beliefs of each denomination based on their reading of the bible.)
If we know the message (S) and we know the content received (R) (original content compared to received content) we can analyze any differences and label the difference i.e. NOISE which we will call (N) (determine amount of error.)
Here is the model of our system of communication: S----->(N)----->R
To determine how much noise entered our communication system we would subtract R-S = N The difference is obtained and NOISE is quantified. (How much corruption in the message is attached to belief.)
___________________________________________________________________________________
PROBLEM: We can't know what we DON'T know. We would first have to know the original "message" to determine the noise. What then?
What if we don't actually know if the signal we received is even a MESSAGE or not? (i.e. What if no God transmitted a message?)
What if it is all noise? (What if humans only believed they had god's message but were wrong?)
But, it may be a message corrupted by noise? (Errors of corruption changed the content of the message) ___________________________________________________________________________________
How do we model our inferences?
We have three types of possible message NOISE
1. No message ever actually given by an existing god/ no message ever given by a non-existing god
2. Actual message given by existing god / actual message given by men who only thought it was from god, but, message was somehow corrupted.
3. An actual message was given but never by means of men or by oral teaching or writing, i.e. "other" ______________________________________________________________________________________________
What data can be assembled and quantified for each of the above and what is the probability of error in identification? _______________________________________________________________________________________________
After each data set is gathered and analyzed what will the result look like?
1. A lack of coherence and consistency resulting in contradictory messaging will indicate a NON-MESSAGE
2. Quality of results from a divine message (even though partially corrupted) will necessarily be greater than results from non-divine source as evidenced by the impact on the believers within each group AS COMPARED WITH any OTHER belief system. i.e. Christians with an actually divine message will fare better than all other methods of living.
3.The singularity of results (miraculous)otherwise received (non oral, written) will create an obvious differential with all other religious claimants' results QUANTIFIABLY.
___________________________________________________________________
NOTE: Non-quantifiable "claims" are not treated as either data or results.
Conclusion: A. Even an inferior message from a living God will outperform any other counterfeit transmission. The proof of this outperformance will be quantified, detectable and beyond disputations.
B. The inferiority of a message from a non-deity source will be only as successful as human philosophy. Without a significant observable, quantifiable DIFFERENCE between A and B no divine origins can be attributable.
Since all transmission of all messages from all true gods and all messages from mere men who "think" they received messages from true gods will each be subject to the same possible noise it is the COMPARISON of outcome which determines.
Example: If medicine A makes claims of cure and medicine B makes claims of cure but placebo C produces the same results
then there is no quaitifiable statistical proof that either A or B is superior in any way to C.
For either A or B to actually be effective there MUST BE QUANTIFIABLE STATISTICS (i.e. evidence) supporting their claims.
Question: Comparing all religions and claims by those religions can it be said religious people ACTUALLY are quantifiably better off than
non religious persons? How would we measure? What data can you offer either way? What do you conclude and why?