Thanks. I don't figure you're perfect either.You're certainly doing your part.
No. Nothing wrong with being human, and being human is no excuse to commit atrocities and destroy the earth. Our apologies are to be for be for the way we treat each other and the way we treat creation in general.And what does that mean specifically? What are you suggesting that I should do differently to accept responsibility for my shortcomings? Submit and beg forgiveness for being human?
Has nothing to do with either being secular or the church's agenda, it's everyone's agenda and in everyone's interest to get right or be in big trouble on a planet we call home. Everything doesn't have to seem so divisive to you. Not because the church wants to draw clear lines means you also have to do the same. that wouldn't make you look any better. You would just be replacing theocratic tyranny with a secular autocracy. Indeed, the church has brought much flak upon itself and well deserved, but what makes you think you or secular rule would be any better? It would probably end up being quite a beastly abomination of the worse type of tyrannical rule, much worse that the church could ever birth upon humanity.That's secular humanism's agenda,not the church's. It's philosophy is divisive, pessimistic, misanthropic, obstructionist, and sterile. What has it produced of value that couldn't be done as well or better without it?
Really? Give me an example then. I'm sure you won't say The United States. Dubai and Qatar U.A.E. are Islamic countries and they seem to do quite well for themselves. Do you disagree?The planet has become better every time authoritarian, faith based thought has been replaced by reason and evidence based thought,as when theocracies became secular democracies, and revelation and superstition became science.
Excellent example. All from a racist that was excommunicated by his church and Germanic Luther bible, banned. Surely you can do much better than this.This is the legacy of Judeo-Christianity:
Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." - Martin Lutherm, father of Protestantism.
Interesting. Prominent intellectual you say. An intellectual that doesn't know that the Savior never started Christianity, it was a Roman concoction of stolen Hebraic ideas that were perverted and names changed and rearranged. An intellectual that may appear to understand history but ends up accepting everything he was told rather than study enough for himself, just like most other people. I have no issue with William Lane Craig, but if he really wrote this stuff, then I believe you better find better examples. I'm sure he must have had better examples of faith and reason (I would hope for his sake). I understand where you may want to go with this, but I'll observe a bit more.Here's is one of your most prominent intellectuals today -a philosopher, no less - on reason
"...And my view here is, that the way in which I know Christianity is true is first and foremost on the basis of the witness of the Holy Spirit. In my heart. And that this gives me a self-authenticating means of knowing that Christianity is true wholly apart from the evidence. And therefore, if in some historically contingent circumstances, the evidence that I have available to me should turn against Christianity, I don't think that that contraverts the witness of the Holy Spirit. >>>snipped for space<<<< He said that if reason contradicts his faith, he would ignore reason and wait for his faith to seem reasonable again to him.