Comment: It does not follow that

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: 1 Corinthians 3:19 For the (see in situ)

It does not follow that

It does not follow that because liberty-minded people have the same opinion about something that Christianity can be interpreted as espousing, the source of that opinion must therefore be Christianity. At first one might be tempted to think that this is a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument, but that would be to concede at least that Christianity preceded liberty-mindedness, which is not likely. Your argument is therefore a non causa pro causa argument.