Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JusticeMachine · 08-08-2003, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by King Rat
I disagree with your statement. One of the reasons I stopped being a theist was because reality simply refused to conform to my religious filters. Reality is much too big to be contained by a shepherds myth.

Reality is too big to be contain or grasped by the human mind. We are flying blind my friend, the real question is where do you place your faith?

Shadowy Man · 08-08-2003, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JusticeMachine
I know of no thiest that is aboslute sure (being without doubt) of his/her belief in GOD. They still reason, the difference is that the want/need it to be true (to them) so they will skew all incoming information they receive to fit their desired picture of reality, as does the athiest.

Interesting because I have encountered many a theist who isn't even capable of conceptualizing a world without their god. To them, the existence of their god is just a brute fact, and to question it is utterly ridiculous.

King Rat · 08-08-2003, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Reality is too big to be contain or grasped by the human mind. We are flying blind my friend, the real question is where do you place your faith?

Oh, ye of little faith...

Mankind is capable of anything my friend, as long as we cast aside the shackles of superstition.

Biff the unclean · 08-08-2003, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JusticeMachine
If this is a correct statement then I would choose a religion, because if it is right then I am covered, if it isn't then I am in the same boat as an athiest, but if I am an athiest, then I have not chance of a good out come if any of the religions are correct.

Unless, of course, god honors courage like we humans do. Then even if you have picked the right religion you are doomed because you pick it from cowardliness

emotional · 08-08-2003, 02:29 PM

JusticeMachine, is this another instance of Pascal's Wager you're trying to argue here? To remind you, Pascal's Wager is an argument from blackmail. The moral person must not submit to a god of blackmail.

Here, in a nutshell, is why Christianity and Islam are untrue.

________________
Le cœur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point.

JusticeMachine · 08-08-2003, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by King Rat
Oh, ye of little faith...

Mankind is capable of anything my friend, as long as we cast aside the shackles of superstition.

I would have to disagree. Anything is an opened ended, infinite statment which would require an opened ended, infinite being to make it true. You and I, however (as is the human species) are close ended and finite.

Through science we can only ever hope to answer how (if that), it can never answer why, and like it or not, religion IMO comes closer to answering why, which in most peoples minds is most important. For the answer to how is a non-motivator, it requires no active response, where as the answer for why does require a response and is a motivator. We exist consciencously for why not for what.

JusticeMachine · 08-08-2003, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by emotional
JusticeMachine, is this another instance of Pascal's Wager you're trying to argue here? To remind you, Pascal's Wager is an argument from blackmail. The moral person must not submit to a god of blackmail.

Here, in a nutshell, is why Christianity and Islam are untrue.

________________
Le cœur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point.

You mistake me, I was merely rebuffing the statment made by you earlier. I choose what I choose, not from a position of weakness or the herd mantality, but from strength in my own beliefs as objective.

JusticeMachine · 08-08-2003, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by emotional
JusticeMachine, is this another instance of Pascal's Wager you're trying to argue here? To remind you, Pascal's Wager is an argument from blackmail. The moral person must not submit to a god of blackmail.

Here, in a nutshell, is why Christianity and Islam are untrue.

________________
Le cœur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point.

A quote from the article you sited

Quote:

However, there is one flaw that Christianity and Islam possess that cannot be glossed over by any means, and that is the evil portent for the majority of mankind. Christianity and Islam both teach that the majority of mankind is destined for a chamber of eternal torture. That alone does best for invalidating those religions. A religion that dooms the majority of mankind to eternal hell cannot be true.

Why? I see not reason that this cannot be true? Where is the contradiction here?

Granted, if it is true, then it is a rather unpleasant truth, for those who are going to hell, but that doesn't make it a untrue statment

emotional · 08-08-2003, 02:41 PM

It is simply too bad to be true.

And it contradicts any notion of goodness and mercy God may still have.

JusticeMachine · 08-08-2003, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by emotional
It is simply too bad to be true.

And it contradicts any notion of goodness and mercy God may still have.

The only follie I have, is not in that statement, but if it is true, did all of the people have an equal chance or opportunity to be saved?

That to me is a much more troubling question.
One to which I don't have (and may never have) an answer to.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-08-2003, 02:29 PM	#25
emotional Banned Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Boxing ring of HaShem, Jesus and Allah Posts: 1,945	JusticeMachine, is this another instance of Pascal's Wager you're trying to argue here? To remind you, Pascal's Wager is an argument from blackmail. The moral person must not submit to a god of blackmail. Here, in a nutshell, is why Christianity and Islam are untrue. ________________ Le cœur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point.

08-08-2003, 02:41 PM	#29
emotional Banned Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Boxing ring of HaShem, Jesus and Allah Posts: 1,945	It is simply too bad to be true. And it contradicts any notion of goodness and mercy God may still have.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.