Cogito Ergo Sum, wootie woot. (+5 points for saying it in Latin)

Precisely. In my first metaphysical essay, I used Descartes as a guide for my argument. Its hard to say "No, you might not exist" to something like that.

Since we are the most advanced, we have came to discover a variety of different and unique religions. If we were not advanced, we would have no religion at all, it would not be existent. Philosphy or science will make as many questions as desired, yet we are only human, we have limits, and these limits tie into our questions. With our limits, we have less questions than we want. If some of our questions seem logical, with answers yet unstable, we thrive for religion. Religion is our next answer from not finding our questions from science out right away. We have these limits, which brings science to a useless, dead ending path, while religion is taught to us and since no one knows that a God exists, we cannot answer, leaving us still being curious. We answer the science questions that we make, but what religion can we possibly answer? None.

That didn't make any goddamn sense. Advanced how? As in intelligence? We used to be much more stupid, and still had religion. If anything, the more advanced we become, the less necessity for religion there will be. With our limits we have less questions? We have MORE questions unanswerable because of our limits. Questions don't seem logical, answers do. Religion is an answer to those who have finished exploring the depths of reality and logic, and commit to the one answer they accept. The last statement, with science being a useless dead ending path, I'm not sure what the bloody hell that was supposed to mean. Science is incredibly useful, and I suppose it is .. dead ending in that it is absolute.

And your ending question? I guess I have to say 'None', because 'None' of that made any goddamn sense.

(See that? I referred to my thesis in my conclusion.)

I disagree.

I am a strong Christian. However, this does not AT ALL mean I am done searching. I am just fairly confident I have the correct answer.

I re-examine all the time though. I question my religion as much as anyone I know. I love metaphysics and such, I'm not that advanced in it (yet), but I can hold my own in a discussion of it I believe.

There are some who take their religion as the final, ultimate answer, no questions asked. I don't respect those people that much.

Just know that we aren't all blind.

Sorry, I made an unfair generalization. But you, as well as I, know that there is a much greater majority of people who take religion as the final answer, and hold no listening ear to anything other than it.

I know that almost all do.

Those are the kind of people that bother me. 99% of my church is like that. There are 2 people other than myself who do not take every part of Christianity for granted- a friend of mine, and a professor who is a Christian.

I find it kind of sad that some people are raised in a Christian home but never even think to question it. What's the point of believing in something if you don't try to prove it wrong first?

Then again, as Colostomizer will run in and tell you, if someone presents what they see as evidence against my faith, I'm guilt of saying that evidence was in the Bible metaphorically. Most of this revolves around, in my view and many others', the world not being created in literally 6 human timed days.

I'm an odd Christian, I guess.

Apology accepted, but you didn't really have to apologize. So take the apology back so I don't have to accept anything.

I wouldn't call that unfair. Generalizations are generally true. There are, of course, exceptions. TeH 3quivocat0r is different from a lot of Christians in that he's not too well described by your generalization. Most are.