The first point was the one I meant to make--that actions and actual
beliefs are what make a religious value, not just professing belief.
This is why I have said--to the distress and annoyance of many--that I
do not see much that was "Christian" about Eliot's life except his
profession of it in all venues. He did not live it as far as I can
>>> [log in to unmask] 11/4/04 1:27:42 PM >>>
I am not trying to suggest that some Christians argue that the
right to bear arms etc. are Christian beliefs. I am saying that
people should be judged by their actions and their actual beliefs
rather than by those of their professed religion, and that on this
basis many Christians are very "unchristian". And when you point
to the Bible for its condemnation of homosexuality, you only
underscore my point that there is much that is in the Bible that
is *ignored* by most Christians, who cherrypick according to their
prejudices, irrespective of what "God" or "Jesus" may have had to
say. This is an entirely separate issue from whether the Bible
and "God's word" have any place in dictating domestic policy.
And, to provide you with a parallel to your question: doesn't it
make sense to you that, if certain members of the Islamic faith
truly believe that America represents Evil, they should do what
they can to prevent that evil? World views, especially absolutist
world views, are dangerous things, and the Christian has no more a
claim on the "right" world view than does anybody else. Of
course, religion being what it is, the mere possession of "faith"
lends the believer the absolute certainty that their view is the
right one, so it doesn't matter to them whether other people might
believe differently--they are on the side of God. Do you not see
why this is a worrying thing?