Mr. Harris, you make a bad case regarding Crackers and Bombers. Agreed—believing that a Cracker becomes Jesus is pretty lame. But if I believe that if I blow up a bus of Jews, I go straight to heaven and they go to hell, this is WAY MORE than lame.
We agree that the logical basis of these beliefs are unwarranted. However, you are mistaken when you say they have equal status. It's simple. People are aware of the consequences of their beliefs. The "Cracker is Jesus" does not lead me to kill people. Suicide bombing is doubly wrong: an unwarrented belief from start to finish. It has no epistemological warrant (no basis) and no moral warrant (no just consequence).
Believing the Cracker is God has no epistemological warrant, but the moral warrant is strong. This belief is still valid to the degree that the logical consequence is good. The basic idea is sound. Somebody did something very significant for you. Remember it. Remember also that you are capable of evil. Always be ready to admit it and change. This is the basic meaning of communion.
Communion is a ceremony of good moral logic whether you believe in God or not. It does not have a reductio ad absurdum; suicide bombing does. Moreover, not all theories of communion require us to believe God becomes a Cracker. If you knew the history of these ideas, you'd be able to comment on them well. As it stands, you blow smoke and spin.
