Add new comment

I believe your guest grossly mischaracterized Christianity in the following quote:

Ms. Braestrup: Then if we look at — and, you know, this is an argument I have with, probably a continuous argument I have with Christianity. Is I always felt that it was answering a question I wasn't asking. And the question of sort of if you decide that the most important thing, you know, the highest possible value is life, that it's breath in the body and walking around and eating sandwiches and whatever, then you're lost. Then you've lost. You know, because we're all going to die. So then you have to posit this whole other set of things that you can't see and you can't connect with. And as I said, I'm a practical person. I want to be able to see it and I want to be able to do it.

So if I posit instead that the most important thing is love, then what I have is, yes, I have a world that's full of suffering and evil and pain, and I have something to do. I have something to look for, and I have something to do. And to me that works better.

Although, given the size and fractured nature of Christianity, one can find a Christian who will espouse almost any set of beliefs one can imagine, I believe it would be fair to say that the vast majority of Christians espouse the tenant that "God is Love" [1John 4:8,16] as the central tenant of their faith.  How we live our lives is important and should reflect that love, but history is replete with Christians sacrificing their lives for the principal that God loves all his children, following the example set by Jesus, for whom the religion is named.

I believe Ms. Braestrup is confusing Christianity with the medical profession, the latter of which is charged is improving the length and quality of life.