>>They may have good causes, and they may be well-loving, but I'm sorry, they're still wrong!<<

I understand that you think they're wrong. But that doesn't mean that it's a fact. I don't mean to disrespect you or anything, but what you believe is simply what you believe, no matter how sure you are. You can be absolutely positive and be willing to throw yourself off a cliff to prove you believe it and it still does not make it any more true . . . it just shows how wholeheartedly you believe it. To me, what you believe is simply your opinion; I do not see it as fact, and I do not fail to understand it. I simply disagree with you, and if you believe that it means I and everyone else who does not accept it is damned to Hell, it is still your belief and not a fact. You can assert it is a fact. But that does not make it so.

Here's more of what I said to her, the part that makes sense out of context:

I said that humans assume that God is as judgmental as they are. Humans like to hear a definite answer . . . yes or no, guilty or not guilty. I tend to think that, as all-loving and all-beneficial and all-knowing as God is, He would not need to judge us but would *teach* us . . . I learned in philosophy that a guy named Socrates (you've probably heard of him) thought that no man does wrong on purpose. If we do wrong, according to good old Socrates, it is because we have not been taught not to. Therefore, villains should not be *punished*; they should be taught. I can see the truth in this, and so might God. I would think that if humans did something God didn't like, He would not just say "I smite thee!" and throw someone to Hell for all eternity. Your Bible sometimes refers to God as The Father . . . if we do something wrong, as God's children, I can see Him sitting us on His knee and saying, "You have sinned, my son." Then He would talk to us, telling us what we did wrong and why, and tell us to correct ourselves. And then . . . then, He would give us another chance. A loving mother or father would *never* take their child and throw it in a garbage can to rot . . . and I like to think that God, as our father, would never leave us to suffer forever in a pit of Hell. If you believe that any son or daughter of God would be allowed to go to Hell, regardless of accepting Jesus, then there is something wrong with the God concept. Either He loves His children and accepts them all, or He is *not* all-beneficial. And if He accepts and loves all His children, then nobody goes to Hell. It can't be both. . . .

Another time she asked me to try to find even one thing about Christianity that was "wrong." I took her up on it.

A couple specific things I find wrong with Christianity:

Why did God need to send His son to us in order to forgive us for our sins? Why do we need a go-between, a middleman, a . . . personal savior? God is capable of anything. Why could He not forgive us without the help of a half-mortal man?

The point of view of Christianity is also that humans are born "bad"; at least that's what I have gleaned. In Baptism, you can be washed free of the sins you were born with, and in general you are absolved of sin when you accept Jesus. But why are we inherently "bad"? Why are we born with sin? I don't believe that is a very healthy way to see oneself.

Lastly, I believe that solicitation of others to a religion is not fair to anyone and only wastes both parties' time . . . and frankly, Christianity, along with the Jehovah's Witnesses and Hare Krishnas, are famous for this. I think you would probably find it annoying if a Hare Krishna came up to you and gave you a little flier that explains why you should love Krishna (because it is the only way) and never eat meat (because Krishna said so) and meditate every day (because Krishna commands). In essence, Christians do the same thing; they go out seeking to convert everyone they can, and most of the time it does *not* come across nicely . . . it comes across more like "I'm right and you're a sinner; isn't it time you woke up?" This is obviously not the intent, since the Christians only want to help, but most of the time it does not come across the way they want it to, and only bothers the person. Because they are convinced that this is the *only* right way and everyone must accept their personal point of view, and . . . here's the clincher . . . they have no proof that it works, so you have to take it on faith. Do you know how closed-minded that sounds? "I'm right, you're wrong, and you better believe me or you'll go to Hell." That is one of the things I think is wrong with the Christian religion . . . that they are so sure that they are right and everyone else is wrong that they can't allow anyone else's point of view into their minds. I hope you're not like that, and I think that just by bothering to talk to me you're more open-minded than most. :)

Eventually she told me she would have to stop e-mailing me because it took up too much of her time. Oops!