The Central Principle of Christianity is IMMORAL

May Reason and Logic Win the Day in the Face of Religious Ignorance!GRETTINGS!Thanks bigtown. Feel free to comment any additional ideas you might have during and post debate.I would personally like to cover other contentions for the motion but some of this stuff, and some your commentary, is just too good to pass commenting on!Readers, please forgive us! Some of these ideas are very important though it might seem like we are going around in circles. bigtown, thanks for having fun with me!Con's Back and ForthOn one hand you say God in the flesh is Jesus (a man), even agree it was a sacrifice, but then DON'T want to say that it was a "human sacrifice" (?) If it wasn't a human sacrifice then that kind of defeats the purpose! What price would have been paid on our behalf? Easy for a god to do but harder for a man don't you think? To not realize it was a human sacrifice is a bit disingenuous or naive.On one hand you say the only way to salvation is through accepting and believing in this sacrifice (Vicarious Redemption), but then on the other you want there to be exceptions to accommodate those who might not have heard of the idea, what you referred to as mitigating circumstances (?)In almost everything you said, you put forward an idea but then tempered the notion or somehow reserved fully endorsing the position! Maybe you should re-read what you wrote! Which leads me to believe that you don't have these ideas worked like you think you do.Later you then go on to say the most obnoxious thing you could say, "I know how it all works." What?!Wow, the hubris stinks to high heaven! Clearly you don't!My Opinion of Your OpinionsThis is basically why you are having to go back and forth; you are having to accommodate your religious ideas and beliefs with what you also know about the modern world. Most of your beliefs stem from traditions, cultures and histories in which human sacrifice was actually quite common - thus the history of the word scapegoating!Scapegoating and Vicarious Redemption is a religious concept derived out of tribal Middle Eastern, pre-literate, pre-scientific, cultures and history! This is a place in the world where they still behead and stone people! What you don't understand is that Vicarious Redemption (scapegoating) is a religious concept and word - its not a secular opinion of these practices! Its what it actually is!But when we hold these ideas up juxtaposed to what we know today, in conjunction with what we agree are the ethical and moral normatives of today, the immorality and absolute barbarity becomes evident - which in turn makes you want to double talk, sugar-coat, and try to make the idea of human sacrifice seem moral - and spin it as a good thing so that everyone can go to Heaven.. (whether you realize it or not) ..this is madness! You are stuck trying to intellectualize the whole thing with ice, water and steam, natural altruism and dead soldiers!The truth is you have never thought about it in this way, nor do you know as much about it as you think you do, except for maybe the parts that help you sleep better at night! No this is no fairy-tale my friend. It is the sad, shameful, infantile part of our human story that I hope we will one day out-grow!In a previous round did you really say humans have only existed for 6000 years? Seriously? You really mean that? You really believe that?CriticismBigtown, I read and comprehended everything you wrote just fine. You mentioned a Triune-god but failed to explain how this relates to any of the other concepts or how this makes Vicarious Redemption (human sacrifice) any less immoral.What are we supposed to do - just think of ice, water and steam and then - PRESTO! - everything will all make sense?! By-the-way, ice, water and steam are PHYSICAL and change due to temperature and pressure! Is God, Jesus, and Holy Spirit really just like water..? No. Why not say or use Beer, liquor and wine - all three are alcohol.. -PRESTO- ..!Issue of Statistical DataSo far there has been much conjecture and pure assertion in this debate. At some point data, evidence and reliable sources should be introduced to support claims. I'm sorry you feel the way you do about data and statistical analysis bigtown, but this is how we support arguments rather than just give an opinion. If my data is skewed or flawed please find reverse data or provide analysis that can be supported to corroborate your position. If you know how it all works this should be a breeze for you! My guess is that you probably don't want to touch any of the data I mentioned.You said, "I could just argue that the decline of Christian teaching of morality in the West has caused all of these problems in the first place." -Okay, find the reliable and raw data, I will wait. The studies of divorce rates and prison populations religiosity I put forward already negates this!You said, "Estimated 250 million people killed by their own governments in the 20th century alone based on Marxist materialist philosophy."-Okay, well lets bring up the Crusades, the Inquisition, all the religious wars, the burnings and honor killings that have occurred for years, and the daily bomb blasts that still occur if you want to play that game.. I can assure you that this wont win you any points.The data is important because it indicates that being religious actually DOESN'T make people more moral, less likely to commit violent crime, keep their marriage, etc., and so on.. Its actually just the opposite [1][2][3][4].If you eliminated all of the atheist and agnostics in the US you would lose over 90% of the National Academy of Science [5][6] but only 0.02% of the prison population or less, never more than 0.07% (this is less than 1%)! This is the raw data [1][2][3][4].It is also a fact, in general, as one's education level goes up the less likely they are to be religious. Study after study demonstrates this over and over.Natural MoralityI will have this discussion with you in the comments if you like. I have already debated the issue of Natural Morality in a previous debate if you would like to read what I think about it.You ask where does it come from? Where do you think it comes from?Your Assumptions of ME"You're a relativist" ...No I'm not a relativist because I believe some things are more true than other things - therefore cannot be relative. I'm someone who still believes there is truth in the world."You will just go with whatever is cool or happening in society" ...No, you are doing what society says to do, ironically. Christians make up the majority of the population, so you are the majority of society. I understand the Christian mentality to distinguish its adherents from a so called secular world - but none of the individuals from the group really does except for extremist groups like the Westboro Baptist Church - which is ironic because they are like the only Christians who do not lack the courage of their convictions in the political and social arena and live as such - though we would both agree they are extremist.. But they are right in their behavior as it is indicative or a true literalism and reading of the Bible, which is what you have to water down to accept as I have pointed out.Cited Source Referances:[1] http://www.pewforum.org...[2] http://www.patheos.com...[3] http://www.alternet.org...[4] http://ffrf.org...[5] http://www.stephenjaygould.org...[6] http://humanevents.com... Philosurfer