k6ovr4 <a href="http://rgbvuzmjtbwo.com/(approve sites)">rgbvuzmjtbwo</a>, [url=http://ggqsgqsftguf.com/(approve sites)]ggqsgqsftguf[/url], [link=http://nwaffeizlqfs.com/(approve sites)]nwaffeizlqfs[/link], http://hibbpnzohdyo.com/(approve sites)
How can you claim to have a monopoly on the truth? There are so many other beliefs in the world that more than one must be correct!
Pluralism is the idea that more than one conflicting belief is correct. Relativism is the idea that no single belief can be more correct than the others. If either of these ideas held water, then life would be terrible for human beings. We are creatures with a conscience. We organize ourselves under governments. We hold certain truths to be self-evident. But if there are competing truths that must receive equal credence, then we might as well take off our clothes and run wild under the trees, because we are really mere beasts at heart.
This principle applies to the area of religious beliefs as much as anywhere else. We communicate with words. Words mean things. Put together, words can express thoughts, which have greater meaning still. But just about every thought we can have is contradicted by at least one other thought. It's inevitable that people will express contradictory thoughts. And as self-aware creatures with consciences, we naturally differentiate between what's true and what's not. We even differentiate between what's good and what's bad. Whatever is beautiful, whatever is true, and whatever is good are things we know we should cherish. The rest can and probably should be discarded.
Where does that leave us? It leaves us with questions like, "What is beautiful?" "What is true?" "What is good?" Not to mention, "What is love?" Human beings need the answers. But as you may have observed, every person can come up with his own definition, until the words are made meaningless again. That's where this objection comes from. You may think that the Christian' expression of what is true has no greater validity than the same description from an atheist. You are right, insofar as the Christian's expression is his own. But suppose that what a certain Christian says did not come from him, but from the Creator of us all. If that supposition is true, then what the Christian says does carry more weight. In fact, it carries all the weight.
Maybe you deny outright that it's possible for a Christian to have special knowledge from our Creator. If so, then I'd suggest you read the Bible once yourself, supposing the possibility that it really is the inspired Word of God. But then, maybe you have a hard time thinking that the Bible is the only real holy book. How about the Vedas, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, The Origin of Species? OK. Then after you read the Bible, granting (for the sake of argument) that it's true, and after you've come to your conclusion on that -- read the others too. See for yourself. But don't tell me that because someone somewhere has written something he calls holy, that the real thing can't be accepted! So the point is that Christians have no more authority on what is true than you do, but the basis for faith that Christians stand upon does. If you are not a Christian I don't expect you to accept that right now, because you simply can't. In fact, you can't even want to. First, you have to see for yourself.
By the way, if you don't have time to read the whole Bible, stop by your nearest Bible-believing Christian congregation instead. (No, that's not redundant, sadly.) They should offer a course of instruction that introduces you to what the Bible says. It may not be quite as good, but it's better than nothing.
LgAjC2? <a href="http://etbmgdwfmxvy.com/(approve sites)">etbmgdwfmxvy</a>, [url=http://apgbssjztmjt.com/(approve sites)]apgbssjztmjt[/url], [link=http://ehzxpxnoohlx.com/(approve sites)]ehzxpxnoohlx[/link], http://ruhgfxlrnycr.com/(approve sites)