mrglass08

A member of Yahoo Answers made an unsubstantiated claim that Christianity has caused more death and destruction than anything else in history. I asked them for documentation and received more unsubstantiated claims. I try to answer their accusations and am told I am wrong because I do not agree with them. Then they send me one final message and basically say that I am too closed minded to agree with them and block off contact. Should I assume that this is typical of the people who disapprove of Christianity here, they do not have to prove their statements and if I do not agree with them, no matter what the arguments I use are, I am wrong and intolerant as well as not being open minded enough to understand them so I should be blocked from further conversation. That just seems to be a little to close to what Christians are sometimes accused of doing to not smack of hypocrisy. I would like to know now if this will be typical responses to criticism of views, because if it is maybe I should rethink how I use my time.

I have seen several questions blame Christians for the vast majority of wars so just for curiosity's sake could you please tell me what wars and in what way they were caused solely by Christians for the purpose of Christianity? Check back because I will try to refute your conclusions and everybody might learn something.

So I asked a question if a tool can be blamed for evil and the majority said it is the user of the tool.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AlWZl...

If that is the case then why do people blame religion for being evil? The religion is a tool, it is inanimate and can be used for purposes both sacred and profane. Why do the people insist on blaming the religion when it is the people who use it for evil? The evils done by the church are done by men for their own selfish motives, but that does not change what the tool was meant to accomplish. It also does not mean the religion actually teaches people to do such a thing. It works in the same way with science, by itself science is neither good nor evil it is how you use it. Curing disease would be a good outcome but if someone started a war to give natural selection a helping hand it would be an evil outcome of the use of science. So why do we call religion evil if it is man?

If i were to pick up a sword and injure someone, which would be evil, myself or the sword? This is just so I can gain understanding for a future question.

I am currently reading through The God Delusion and God is Not Great in an attempt to understand the atheist point of view. Are any atheists willing to match me by reading Mere Christianity by CS Lewis and The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel.

I have heard several times here that evolution is not abiogenesis. Well then what is it because the only way I see a living thing come from naturalistic explanations is through nonliving things. This is abiogenesis if I understand it correctly. As a religious believer I believe that God created life because it makes more sense than nonliving matter suddenly springing life without some kind of outside influence. If I have misunderstood then let me know. Do not tell me to go to another section, I am asking you because I am curious to your answers.

I know of nothing that is not in dispute or has been completely disproved for the spontaneous generation of life on Earth.

Miller and Oparin's experiment of lightening in a mixture of gases to form chemical generation of life was disproved because the early Eath did not contain those gases.

The long time line theory doesn't work because if the earth is only 5 billion years old like scientists think that it is then that is not enough time to get better odds than 1 chance in 10 to the 60th power. That number is so high as to not even be feasible.

Laws of thermodynamics claim that left alone systems will develop more chaos as opposed to more order so how can leaving alone a bunch of chemicals lead to the creation of a more complex system that is a living thing.

Do not tell me to go read a science book because I have and the answers do not match up any better than how creationism says life came into existence. Point out to me where the facts support you 100% instead of using faith.