Hi Dragan,

There is no conflict - in the sense that one can rationally examine the claims of the various religious systems. I suspect that you and I are a lot closer in our opinions about religion (in general) that most would suspect. Let me see if I can give you a sense of what I mean.

I have two basic thoughts.

1. Religion, defined as a formalized presentation of "the truth", more often than not, does more damage than good and is designed to mentall, emotionally ans spiritually control. Not good.

2. The historic christian position teaches that God wants a personal RELATIONSHIP with each human, man or woman, all being equal in His eye. It teaches us to test and examine and prove all things (i.e. use our minds). Good.

Religions, per se, have all-too-often caused more harm than good. The reason is that they tend to presume to be able to do for the individual what only God can do for the individual. They lose sight of their original first mission (in the case of christianity, leading men to Christ) and their first mission becomes their own survival and aggandizement.

For example, I happen to think that the Roman Catholic church has often presented men (priests, cardinals, the pope - many of whom are wonderful people - many who are scoundrels) as the final arbiter of all-things-spiritual, thereby inserting some man between the individual and God. Look at the various societies around the globe that are predimonantly Catholic and more often than not the populace will exhibit a dependency that is unhealthy. I don't at all hate Catholics but I do think that many of their teaching are not correct. I could say the same for pretty much all of the various segments of christianity.

That doesn't mean that the claims of christianity are false (or correct for that matter). Rather it misses the point and sidesteps the issue.

Historic christianity (as defined by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer) is "the Bible plus nothing", but even that being open for examination.

No, Christianity, properly understood DEMANDS one use their minds and encourages questions and research. Anyone who says, "Don't ask questions, just believe", should be seen as improperly representing Christianity.

That there (most certainly) are groups (sects, churches, organizations) that purport to speak FOR God in no way is a proof that God cannot speak for Himself.

So, your reaction, in my opinion, is partly correct. There are many religious systems that are not logical. The historic Christian position is not one of them. But remember, don't use what men say it is. Go find out for yourself. Just understand the difference between 'religion' and 'relationship' and that will help you to sort out what does not have value and what does.

The historic Christian position most certainly can and will stand up to scrutiny while all others will not. Understand that as a christian I would no more want you to take my word on this matter than the man in the moon - just do honest research is all I'd ask.



>>Hi Dragan,
>>
>>I watched & was unimpressed. Bad logic; arguing from the lessor to the greator.
>
>Thanks, you made my day. This is about religion, and you bring in logic :).