On Jan 22, 2007, at 10:53 AM, Charlie Coleman wrote:
>> I love the self-serving definitions. You declare what a
>> Christian
>> is, and anyone who doesn't fit that mold is by your definition not a
>> Christian. Yet you cavalierly claim that Stalin was an atheist, yet I
>> feel that all atheists respect human life, knowing that there is no
>> afterlife, so there is no way that Stalin could have been an atheist.
>
> Hmm... Didn't you just do the same thing I did?
Uh, yeah. That's called "illustrating a point".
> I'm willing to accept Stalin was not an atheist from your point of
> view if
> you'll accept Hitler was not a Christian from my point of view.
That's silly. How about "I'll accept that up is down if you'll
accept that left is right"?
Redefining terms is not the way to advance a discussion; it only
serves to confuse. A better approach might be to simply say that
Hitler was not a good Christian, or was an evil Christian, and that
he hardly is representative of Christianity as a whole.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
