|
|
Post by Dragon*of*Heaven on Oct 20, 2005 21:13:19 GMT -5
I had a discussion with some theists and they put up an argument I couldnt really surmount. (I had been at it for hours) but I still would like some help. Their argument basicly goes that if there is a question of there being a god or not why not just find the religion with the least holes ( for them this is catholisism) and belive in it. That way if for some reason there is another place after this world you would get in. Now im kinda tierd right now so its not makeing a lot of sence to me. if any one could help out please do.
|
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Oct 21, 2005 1:02:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Oct 21, 2005 6:22:17 GMT -5
I know it is beside the point, but doesn't it tell you something that they choose catholicism? The least holes would probably be a new age interpretation. They are working from the conclusion, looking to support catholicism because they have already decided it is right. For the record, the most monumental hole in catholicism is that one should pray to Mary.
You are foolish to even try to argue with them, because you can see their arguments are contrived after the fact. What you don't realise is that ALL arguments for religion are contrived after the fact. All religion is corrupt.
Pascal's wager is possibly the most honest argument to make for religion. Viewing religion as a precautionary measure, one must surely realise there is no way to weigh the possibilities. There's no evidence that anyone has ever got to the afterlife. There is nothing supporting it at all. One might as well believe the boogieman will get you in the night if you turn the light out.
Why not turn the light out and see what happens. People do that, right? They brave the dark, then learn it was a lie. Why not take the same approach to religion? Don't believe and see what happens. There is no reason to believe there is any afterlife, and less so that there is some entry requirement. But dad, I don't want the boogieman to get me...
|
|
|
|
Post by Superhappyjen on Oct 22, 2005 11:37:06 GMT -5
I was just thinking of the movie version of Polar Express where the little boy has trouble hearing Santa's bells because he's losing his belief. For him, simply chanting "I believe, I believe" is enough to restore his faith.
But in real life belief isn't a choice. You can't simply believe in Santa to keep from getting coal in your stocking. You either believe, or not. Having this really horrible consequence for not believing doesn't help, if you're not presented with enough evidence or argument to convince you that such a consequence exists.
I agree that they have a point. If they're wrong, no biggie. If we're wrong, we all go to hell! Clearly we have insentive. My point is there's no switch for us to flip to change our minds.
|
|
|
|
Post by created101 on Nov 27, 2005 5:54:57 GMT -5
Rather than trying to find holes in Catholicism, why not turn straight to the source. try to find holes in the bible itself before declaring christianity as false.
|
|
The Reservoir Dog
Seasoned Citizen
I'm sick of following my dreams, I'm just gonna ask where they're goin' and meet up with em' later.
Posts: 136
|
Post by The Reservoir Dog on Nov 27, 2005 15:11:58 GMT -5
We have already pointed out holes in the bible and in christianity that Godzilla could fit through. Nice try though.
|
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Nov 27, 2005 15:35:26 GMT -5
Rather than trying to find holes in Catholicism, why not turn straight to the source. try to find holes in the bible itself before declaring christianity as false. How many holes do you want? members.aol.com/ckbloomfld/ |
|
twobirds
Seasoned Citizen
Religion is a con.
Posts: 111
|
Post by twobirds on May 30, 2006 10:42:25 GMT -5
I would not force myself to believe in something that I do not believe in "just in case". To me that is not right thinking. I don't believe so I don't worry about it, they do(religous people). So there is no pressure on me, it is on them to pressure me to believe "just in case".
|
|
|
|
Post by necroshine on May 30, 2006 17:31:57 GMT -5
If you believe “just in case” then you don’t believe with your heart. That will not get you into heaven. You will go to hell with a “just in case” believe in god. For a religious nut to say that shows you how little they know about the bible and gods rules.
Not like your going to see this but of you name a page I’m sure we can find a hole in it somewhere.
Take a shot. How about the first page? There are many holes in the first page alone.
What do you mean about go to the source? Christianity is newer than Catholicism. Wouldn’t that make Catholicism the true source?
|
|
twobirds
Seasoned Citizen
Religion is a con.
Posts: 111
|
Post by twobirds on May 31, 2006 16:48:39 GMT -5
For a religious nut to say that shows you how little they know about the bible and gods rules. How true that is, most god lovers that talk to me have no idea wtf they are talking about. Most of the time I just let them put their foot in their mouth. |
|
Amy
Broken-in Plebe
Do not follow the blind - in other words, theists
Posts: 87
|
Post by Amy on Jun 2, 2006 13:44:40 GMT -5
For a religious nut to say that shows you how little they know about the bible and gods rules. How true that is, most god lovers that talk to me have no idea wtf they are talking about. Most of the time I just let them put their foot in their mouth. Haha. You know what is so pathetic? I had to explain to my devout Catholic mom why the Da Vinci Code movie would piss off the Church. In all honesty, most Christians/catholics have no idea what the hell is going on within their own church or with their own religion... Gets you thinking... |
|
