Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! My pleasure. I always enjoy civil discourse. I would agree; that is the essential core to Christianity, as evidenced in 1 Corinthians 13 (the last verse of which is "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.") I would argue that they represent a branching off of true Christianity. True Christianity remains intact, however much concealed it may be. They have created a corruption, and while they may CALL it Christianity, that does not make it so. I am Christian. To what are you referring when you ask why I don't hold the same view of the old testament? (Same view as what?) If you are asking why I don't accept the NT as divine, but do accept the OT, it is because Paul wrote in one of his letters (that was later included in the NT) that the scriptures are complete. Nothing should be added to or removed from them. That would include the entire NT, since it wasn't in the picture at the time of his writing. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I agree, if there is a God, he isn't racist. However, I suspect that the ability to communicate with God is a genetic development that first occurred in the Hebrews. During the time of the OT, in a need to protect that genetic marker, it was necessary for the Hebrews to maintain a relatively clean lineage. I believe this is what is meant by "God's chosen people" (remember, no one at that time knew anything about genetics, and wouldn't have been able to describe this in any other way). But you are very correct, that believing one's own way to be the "correct" way, and intolerance of others is a sure-fire recipe to all the atrocities you list. AND, in Christianity, none of those things are taught. (Well, in the NT anyway...) I seek SCRIPTURE that is used to justify these atrocities, because it isn't. The crusades, jihads, the inquisitions, have all been motivated by NON-RELIGIOUS factors, and misinformation (i.e., corruption) was used to motivate the masses. Hatred is the cause, not the effect. Perhaps now, but my issue with Catholicism is what it did to the name of Christianity for a thousand or so years. I didn't feel as though you were singling me out, but rather simply prefaced my response with the statement that I didn't know who you were directing your comment to, so I would go ahead and answer regardless (rather than waiting to let whomever you were targeting speak for themselves). Regarding your claim that I am ignoring something... I haven't noticed any specific verses you have raised, but would be happy to provide additional explanation for anything that seems wrong to you. (But please let's not waste time with the Levitical law, which was a set of physical laws for a nation at a specific point of time. There is no indication that they were spiritual guidances, and in fact they largely use the term "unclean" rather than "sin" because they weren't being called out as sins. They were in fact unclean, and in a time where there was no medicine and little technology, in a developing civilization, cleanliness was key in survival.) Yes, those who have absconded scripture to control others (like the Catholic Church) make me very skeptical of their intentions as well. Are you suggesting that there are specific verses (or chapters, or books) in the Old or New Testament that fall into that category?