Clarification/Follow-up by Oldstillwild on 06/30/06 11:10 pm:
and

from http://www.blupete.com/Literature/Biographies/Philosophy/Locke.htm#Human

The elementary question to be asked by all philosophers is, "what is the nature and ultimate significance of the universe." As things developed in philosophy, three camps emerged: there were those who hold reality subsists only in thought -- these are idealists; those who hold reality to subsist in only matter -- these are materialists; and those who hold that reality subsists both in thought and in matter -- these are dualists.

Ultimately, in his acceptance of the existence of God, Locke was a dualist -- though only barely so; he did not consider man to be a divine creature fixed with ideas on coming into this world. Locke was an empiricist, viz., all knowledge comes to us through experience. "No man's knowledge here can go beyond his experience." There is no such thing as innate ideas; there is no such thing as moral precepts9; we are born with an empty mind, with a soft tablet (tabula rasa) ready to be writ upon by experimental impressions. Beginning blank, the human mind acquires knowledge through the use of the five senses and a process of reflection. Not only has Locke's empiricism been a dominant tradition in British philosophy, but it has been a doctrine which with its method, experimental science, has brought on scientific discoveries ever since, scientific discoveries on which our modern world now depends.

Clarification/Follow-up by Dark_Crow on 07/01/06 1:40 am:
From the, "Institute of Historical Research"


"William Walwyn was even prepared to defend toleration for atheists. Nevertheless, Protestant tolerationists were not premature advocates of the permissive society and most found it hard to see how atheists (who were God-denying rather than God-fearing) could be good citizens. Jonathan Israel has recently argued that there was a gulf between the moderate Enlightenment Protestantism of Locke and the radical Enlightenment freethought of Spinoza. Whereas Locke presented a theological argument for freedom of practice for all peaceful religions…"
http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/paper/coffeyJohn.html

Clarification/Follow-up by tonyrey on 07/01/06 4:14 pm:
Hank,

It depends on which version of Christianity you have in mind :)