Dominic, do you still consider yourself a Christian?
Yes I do. But not a fundamentalist/bible literalist.
Understanding is always evolving. And there are many different paths this can take. I believe there is a deep and essential core of truth within all the major religions and it is in complete agreement between them. The best word I have found so far to describe this core is 'mysticism'.
Furthermore, any person who espouses no religion, but tries to live with compassion, wisdom and honesty is also demonstrating that same core belief.
I don't follow this. Perhaps you could expound a bit more. Because so far as I can tell the 'deep and essential core of truth within all major religions' that is 'in complete agreement between them' leaves you with living a life of compassion, wisdom, and honesty. Which is great; I just don't see what religion has to do with it at this point.
I am fully expecting that we will all be able to compare notes at the 'end' and then we will more clearly see the pros and cons of each others' different paths.
I don't think it's necessary for sentient beings to have to wait until the 'end' to compare notes. I'm sure we could come up with some kind of methodology to do this comparison of pros and cons of these different paths. This methodology would probably boil down to some manner of establishing confidence in the veracity of conclusions based upon observations while accounting for potential for individual/group biases by, say, trying our best to consider only objectively verifiable evidence.
I suspect that this 'process' if you will could be outlined as proposing some hypothesis, making observations in reality to collect data, analysis of this data to determine if it supports or refutes the proposed hypothesis, drawing a conclusion about reality from this analysis, having a bunch of other people repeat all of this, filtering out cognitive/personal biases, and adjusting conclusions appropriately as time progresses.
[Addressing this same question/answer from a strictly Christian perspective, the above points can be summarised by 'God will ensure the best possible outcome'. Christianity would not make sense otherwise.]
...and it seems reasonable to be able to evaluate the statement 'god will ensure the best possible outcome' as either true or false. Obviously more information would be needed, such as a definition of 'god' (characteristics of what 'god' is) and 'best outcome' (outcome of what, and how does one establish a metric to evaluate an 'outcome' as worst, worse, better, or best).
Dominic, I'm wondering why you consider yourself a Christian. Labels can be tricky things and I know what characteristics I
associate with being Christian, but I suspect that some of those do not apply to you. Perhaps that is something too far off topic for this thread though.