That's not really the issue, though. The issue is whether there is objective
evidence for the Christian moral standard (or, rather, evidence that one
of the many Christian moral standards is the "real" one). And so far, there
hasn't been any.
>And I'm not saying let's not count the atrocities the Church has
>committed, but then, let's not overlook the good that it has done, either.
Nor am I saying that we should overlook the good.
>Russell:
>> This is not to say that Christianity has not helped you, or Jim, or Bill,
>> or numerous other people. But that doesn't mean that it's for everybody.
>
>The only reason we think it *is* for everybody is that Christians think
>that everyone is meant (by God) to be united with Him in Heaven and Jesus
>said that He was "the Way the Truth and the Life" and nobody gets "to the
>Father except by Me (Jesus, the 2nd person of the Trinity)"
And this is one of the biggest problems I have with Christianity -- the
belief (without any objective evidence) that everyone *has* to accept
*your* view of the universe. There are other religions like this as well,
and I have the same problems with them.
>I realize this is an argument from an authority you don't recognize; I'm
>just trying to relate how some of us see it.
OK, I understand that.
>PS. I like your new signature.
Thanks!
_____________________________________________________________
| Russell Stewart |
| http://www.rt66.com/diamond/ |
|_____________________________________________________________|
| Albuquerque, New Mexico | diamond@rt66.com |
|_____________________________|_______________________________|
Tautology
(n) See truism.
Truism
(n) See tautology.