Joe is right. Discussing religion can bring out the worst in people, myself included.

However, it could be that what you have to say might not be palatable to some whilst common sense to others?

The problem is; if a nice person says and does nice things and claims their Christianity makes them a nice person, and a twisted criminal says their crimes were a Christian act, I suppose the nice person will disown them and their take on Christinity.

But to an onlooker, which is the Christian?

Joe mentions another thread where a couple of people are arguing for the literal interpretation of the bible, the flood happened etc. One of them said you had to believe or you are not a Christian.

How can I automatically dismiss that and agree with those who say it is a metaphor? One has to be wrong, but just because one comes over as more rational, doesn't make them the automatic winner?