Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and uploads. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Athiestic mistakes
Topic Started: May 30 2008, 11:17 AM (131 Views)
Goda
Topic Starter
I was presented with the idea that the conciousness ceasing to exist after death is comparable to sleeping. I countered with the fact the brain is quite active during sleep, and the brain always dreams, but those dreams are often forgotten. The other person then denied this scientific knowledge. I think it is hypocritical to use science to attack religion, but then deny it in ones own defense.

I was presented with the idea that all things have equal probability, and therefore its equally probable that a deity exists to a deity not existing. I would now like to state that this is where logic and reason some in to promote a deity. If a deity does exist, one would want to believe in it, and be on its good side. If it doesn't exist, then nothing matters at all. Since both have an equal chance of being true, it is logical to choose the existence of a deity, because if you choose that there is not one, and then there is one, well, you're in trouble. One would then argue that you can't "live life to the fullest" when "constrained" by a deity. I would whole-heartily disagree. I know (of) many joyful religious people. Not just happy, but joyful. And its not a case of ignorance is bliss either. These people know of the terrible things of the world, and really care about them(and try to help others with them), but can still find joy. I personally feel that this is what makes me Church so great.

I would now like to discuss seemingly "liberals" who "hate" Christian churches, Christianity, or Religion as a whole. Martin Luther King Jr said "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Why can't individual theists be judged by the content of their character and not by their beliefs? Why can't religions be judged by their doctrines, and not by the actions of their individuals which may sometimes (falsely or not) be in the name of that religion? Cut the prejudice. Hate hate, and not religion.

I have more to write, but I have to go 2 minutes ago.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
d0nk3y
Member Avatar
current status: lurking more
Quote:
 
I was presented with the idea that the conciousness ceasing to exist after death is comparable to sleeping. I countered with the fact the brain is quite active during sleep, and the brain always dreams, but those dreams are often forgotten. The other person then denied this scientific knowledge. I think it is hypocritical to use science to attack religion, but then deny it in ones own defense.


Comparing death to a time prior to birth is much more effective, in my opinion. I'll agree with the rest of your points, but ("in my opinion") you essentially cease to exist...



Quote:
 
I was presented with the idea that all things have equal probability, and therefore its equally probable that a deity exists to a deity not existing.


I don't know who told you that.

The rest of your paragraph was pascal's wager, disregarding the common criticism. You assume that the correct god is worshiped. You assume that God rewards belief. Yeah, we're back to the rest of the topics :P "Do you claim to know the mind of god?" :P


Quote:
 

I personally feel that this is what makes me Church so great.

hehe

Quote:
 
I would now like to discuss seemingly "liberals" who "hate" Christian churches, Christianity, or Religion as a whole. Martin Luther King Jr said "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Why can't individual theists be judged by the content of their character and not by their beliefs? Why can't religions be judged by their doctrines, and not by the actions of their individuals which may sometimes (falsely or not) be in the name of that religion? Cut the prejudice. Hate hate, and not religion.


I hope this isn't (and do not think it is) directed towards me... When people say they "hate religion" they are speaking in a very generalized sense. "Religion" has done great things for the world. There have been many humanitarian efforts. The Muslim resurrection of science and philosophy (following the Christian suppression) was revolutionary. Jesus was a pretty cool guy, at least judging by the books. There have also been undeniable detrimental effects, and not just individualistic ones.
But the "hate" goes more towards the individual fools.. and to those who try to force religion upon people, etc.

I do not hate religion, (and I partially regret an essay by a similar title I may have written) but I do not believe religion is necessary to improve the quality of life. I believe it causes more problems than it fixes. I believe it is fairly logical in a way, but not to me (and I don't suggest I'm 'better' because of it).




And I apologize for my ignoring the other threads! I don't think I've even read them yet, I've just been lazy :(
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Philosophy & Debate · Next Topic »
Add Reply