I have to throw my cards down and say, I know many a good christian but on a level of organised religion, I can't find fault with any of illosopher's charges.

religious folk here are prolly sick of defending your faiths, and feel you shouldn't have to. but I don't think illosopher's intentions are to come here and stir up sht, same as not every deacon is bent.

I feel like the questions are valid because it's many a christian that simply doesn't know any different, common religious defense being 'well, it works for me'. and you're good people, intelligent people - and that's fair.

just interpreted illosopher's viewpoint as being similar to questioning an addict who maintains that substanceofchoice is the angel that keeps him/her steadfast and carries him/her through each day. question is, does it?

we're beyond that stage, as a civilization, where you can present a set of rules to follow and respond to any reservations with because He said so. or inheritance/tradition, it worked for them. or if I have to explain you prolly wouldn't understand. etc.

can't accept that..but no disrespect's intended, just seeking simple clarity here and it would be cool if somebody with the knowledge/conviction could go indepth on some of those indictments or claim some of the blame.

my mother had strong christian convictions and I always envied the peace it brought her - I guess I've always wanted some of what she had, but it never happened. so here I am.
______________________________________

seize your time! - marley/wailers

player, this is not a game/said it before when through the door I came.. - ras kass