View Poll Results: What Religion to you is the most logical?

Voters
112. You may not vote on this poll
  • Christianity (Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant)

    18 16.07%
  • Hinduisim (Gaudiya Vaishnavisim, Vaishnavisim, Saivism, Shaktism, Smartism or Vedic Sanatan Dharma)

    3 2.68%
  • Buddhisim (Mahayana, Theravāda or Vajrayāna)

    17 15.18%
  • Jainisim ( Digambara and or others)

    0 0%
  • Islam (Sunni or Shiah)

    13 11.61%
  • Sikhism

    0 0%
  • Judaism

    0 0%
  • Bahaism

    2 1.79%
  • Confucianism

    4 3.57%
  • Shintoism

    1 0.89%
  • Atheisim, (Science prevails)

    45 40.18%
  • Asthetic, (Science may prevail, but only god can reveal the full truth)

    4 3.57%
  • Greek Mythology

    2 1.79%
  • Roman Mythology

    2 1.79%
  • Egyptian Mythology

    1 0.89%
Page 20 of 26 FirstFirst ... 1011121314151617181920212223242526 LastLast
Results 381 to 400 of 501

Thread: The Most Logical Religion

  1. #381
    Thanatos's Avatar Now Is Not the Time
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    33,188

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    KleenClothMaurya,

    Well, if Jesus Christ is the Creator of all things how can your Krishna precede Him, especially since Hindhuism only came into being after the Flood if one reads The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop, backed up by the opinion of linguistic experts of their day.
    Assuming that The Flood happened in the first place. Secondly, you are quoting a man whose studies alongside his contemporaries were around 1800 to 1861 or so. People still actively utilized psuedo-science to determine the origin of peoples. You may want to try referencing someone a little less antiquated, and who actually knows what the hell they are talking about when they discuss anthropologic origins of various peoples.

    Hindhuism is in fact an offshoot of the Babylonian Mysteries.
    Proof, please. People had already vastly migrated beyond the immediate Fertile Crescent region by that point in time, so claiming that everything came straight from the Babylonian Empire will require some proof.

    Over one thousand years had transpired with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the " seed " promised by God in the garden, being carried by certain men like Abel, Enoch etc before the Deluge and long before God dispersed them of Babel. Therefore nothing at all preceeds Christ.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism#History

    The average agreed-upon age of the start of the Vedic religions ranges from 3000 BCE to 1500 BCE or so. This is still at least a thousand years prior to any appearance of the alleged Jesus figure. So yes, it precedes Christ. Oh wait, you're using the Bible again as the infallible proof. That old chestnut. I see we won't be having any honest historical discussions here today.

  2. #382
    GussieFinkNottle's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Britain
    Posts
    2,239

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    The only viewpoint following perfect philosophical logic is agnosticism (not on your list) since no religion has final, incontrovertible evidence (otherwise almost everyone would belong to it). Atheism is equally impossible to prove, since you can't prove a negative. Since you cannot prove or disprove God with any evidence-based certainty, and there is no way you can finally demonstrate that the supernatural does not exist (it's just very unlikely), the only available logical/rational result is to be agnostic. I choose personally to live as an atheist until the unlikely event I am persuaded with evidence to believe in God.

    BTW, Atheism is a 'religion' the way not collecting stamps is a hobby or a turned off TV is a channel.
    A home without books is a body without soul - Marcus Tullius Cicero

    If you rep me, please leave your name. Thx

  3. #383
    Samraat Mahendra Maurya's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pataliputra, Magdha
    Posts
    1,899

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    KleenClothMaurya,


    Well, if Jesus Christ is the Creator of all things how can your Krishna precede Him, especially since Hindhuism only came into being after the Flood if one reads The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop, backed up by the opinion of linguistic experts of their day. Hindhuism is in fact an offshoot of the Babylonian Mysteries. Over one thousand years had transpired with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the " seed " promised by God in the garden, being carried by certain men like Abel, Enoch etc before the Deluge and long before God dispersed them of Babel. Therefore nothing at all preceeds Christ.

    You may think the Vedas, Bhagavatam and Bhagavad Gita were written around 6500-3500 BC as per contemporary findings, This is in fact what Hindus believe. Historians may not agree, but remember that historians are like anyone else and don't have complete information on the past. Scientists only use evidence that can be obtained through the jnanendriyas and there is a limitation to what this type of knowing can give us.


    In ancient times Sanskrit was mostly a spoken language and writing was mainly done on easily degradable materials like leaves. This in contrast to other cultures that have preserved more writings on clay tablets, stone walls and animal skin. There is not much chance that archeologists will dig up 7 million year old Valmiki Ramayana Sanskrit document, but the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. The Vedas describe the River Saraswati which dried around 30,000 BCE


    On top of the limitations of physical science, we must also remember that for a long time western historians have been operating under the assumption that the world is only 5000 years old. Max Muller has dated the Vedic scriptures based on this assumption and Muller's datings have stuck to people's head.

    Hindhuism is in fact an offshoot of the Babylonian Mysteries
    Proof? Show a relationship if it is an "off-shoot" and i will consider what you say.

    Assuming, the floods happened at earliest 7000 BCE, well lets see what happening in India, the Indus Valley Civilization starts, 3000 years have passed since the sinking of Dwaraka. Dwarka also known as Dwarawati in Sanskrit literature is rated as one of the seven most ancient cities in the country.

    The legendary city of Dvaraka was the dwelling place of Lord Krishna. It is believed that due to damage and destruction by the sea, Dvaraka has submerged six times and modern day Dwarka is the 7th such city to be built in the area. Artefacts found date to 12,000 BCE and can be pushed back to even 30000 BCE!!!! Truth is not for all men, but only to those who seek it and personally, the ego and arrogance of modern science and history does not allow them to accept these findings, they can't accept anything that goes against what they want to believe. Established science just won't admit that they may be wrong about a great deal of our history. researchers have fallen victim to thier own ego's as well as the apparent 'black listing' of anything that contradicts there views about our history. There are sites all over the world, India in particular, that potentially indicate massive populations (and therefore even large support means) but dogma prevents any real investigation.
    Ich bin Kaiser von mauryan reiches

  4. #384
    basics's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    11,280

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    " Assuming that The Flood happened in the first place. Secondly, you are quoting a man whose studies alongside his contemporaries were around 1800 to 1861 or so. People still actively utilized psuedo-science to determine the origin of peoples. You may want to try referencing someone a little less antiquated, and who actually knows what the hell they are talking about when they discuss anthropologic origins of various peoples. "

    Thanatos,

    Well, accepting that the Bible is the word of God, especially the Old Testament which was Jesus' Bible, from which He preached, one must then accept that what it says about the Deluge is quite correct. It means then that there was no Hindhu religion until after the Babel peoples were dispersed and after that started by Cush which became the Babylonian Mysteries.

    Again, if one reads Hislop's Two Babylons, one can see that the evidence he gathered was through linguistic experts of and before his day who could root Vishna back to Ninus or Nimrod who was deified as being the " seed " who would die for his people according to what God said at the fall of man. From out of that John in his vision portrayed the wife of Nimrod as being the whore of Babylon in which all men became drunk through her part in the deification which brought in all false religions.

    " The average agreed-upon age of the start of the Vedic religions ranges from 3000 BCE to 1500 BCE or so. This is still at least a thousand years prior to any appearance of the alleged Jesus figure. So yes, it precedes Christ. Oh wait, you're using the Bible again as the infallible proof. That old chestnut. I see we won't be having any honest historical discussions here today. "

    Of course I am using Scripture because it is the measure of all things, authenticated by Jesus Christ, who was there at the Creation of the world on the very basis that He is the Creator and in whom all Scripture was breathed into the writers of each book. So yes, the Bible being God's word, has to be authentic and true simply because of God being God, the only living One there is.

  5. #385
    Aeneas Veneratio's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen (Denmark)
    Posts
    4,703

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Of course I am using Scripture because it is the measure of all things, authenticated by Jesus Christ,
    With a point of view like this, why do you guys persist on arguing with basics? A dead guy authenticating a book written and published after his death, come on...
    Last edited by Aeneas Veneratio; August 17, 2014 at 10:07 AM.
    R2TW stance: Ceterum autem censeo res publica delendam esse

  6. #386
    basics's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    11,280

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by Aeneas Veneratio View Post
    With a point of view like this, why do you guys persist on arguing with basics? A dead guy authenticating a book written and published after his death, come on...
    Aeneas Veneratio,

    Jesus authenticated the part that was His Bible which as He says told of Him and the disciples authenticated the latter part as being witness to all He said, that being their command to tell of it. Funnily enough that command didn't come from a dead guy but the living Saviour after His resurrection having been seen by over four hundred persons. Of course to you it never happened because you were there to witness it never happened or were you?

    So, how do you know it never happened? After all, you have never had the revelation that the born again receive meaning that your knowledge isn't knowledge of Him in any way. In other words you speak from not knowing what is the truth because you are on the outside trying to make best of what you imagine. The only reason you denounce it is because you have no faith to believe, the same as was written of all them that perished in the desert. Now there's a warning if ever there was one.

    " For God gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him shall not perish but hath everlasting life." Note that, " shall not perish " because that's what wilfull disbelief brings in the end. It proves two things. One, that there is life after death, and two, that not knowing Him leads to something not very desirable. Now as an intelligent man but yet on the outside looking in, wouldn't you want the satisfaction of knowing that you are not destined for the latter? Is your mind so shut off to the fact that basics might just be telling you the truth? In other words are you prepared to gamble your soul on what you think is truth?

  7. #387
    Himster's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Dublin, The Peoples Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    9,838

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    Jesus authenticated the part that was His Bible which as He says told of Him and the disciples authenticated the latter part as being witness to all He said, that being their command to tell of it. Funnily enough that command didn't come from a dead guy but the living Saviour after His resurrection having been seen by over four hundred persons. Of course to you it never happened because you were there to witness it never happened or were you?
    Circular reasoning: the bible authenticates the bible because Jesus authenticates the bible because the bible authenticates Jesus because Jesus authenticates the Bible and so on and on and on and on and on. It's a non argument.

    So, how do you know it never happened? After all, you have never had the revelation that the born again receive meaning that your knowledge isn't knowledge of Him in any way. In other words you speak from not knowing what is the truth because you are on the outside trying to make best of what you imagine. The only reason you denounce it is because you have no faith to believe, the same as was written of all them that perished in the desert. Now there's a warning if ever there was one.
    Nobody can know whether or not it happened, no different from red-necks being abducted in New Mexico, or the Yeti or any old nonsense anyone made up any old place any old time. There is no evidence for any of these things, even you don't know, you've had a few dreams (or what deluded people habitually call visions), well so have Hindus, so have Muslims, Mormons, Buddhists, etc. etc. their dreams are just as "real" as yours, they offer no distinguishing features, they're all the same. To believe one on such flimsy "evidence" one would have to believe all of them, or forfeit their intellectual integrity. It's as simple as that.

    " For God gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him shall not perish but hath everlasting life." Note that, " shall not perish " because that's what wilfull disbelief brings in the end.
    Willfull disbelief is a mis-characterization. It implies certain untruths, specifically, the untruth that your position holds any evidence to distinguish it from the infinity of religions that permeate the history, present and future of the Earth. Our position is the stark opposite: truth cannot be altered through will, the opposite of the religious position where dreams (that are willed into existence either consciously or unconsciously) are significant.

    It proves two things. One, that there is life after death,
    No it doesn't, it is the unsupportable assertion that there is life after death. An assertion is not a proof of anything.

    and two, that not knowing Him leads to something not very desirable.
    See above.

    In other words are you prepared to gamble your soul on what you think is truth?
    When the gamble involves infinitely sided dice of infinite number there is no point playing. The dice are already cast, there is no moment when the dice are not cast.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.
    -Betrand Russell

  8. #388
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex Magistrate

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    11,075

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    In other words are you prepared to gamble your soul on what you think is truth?
    Well by not believing anything, I'm at least avoiding believing the wrong thing! That must count for something
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  9. #389

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    In other words are you prepared to gamble your soul on what you think is truth?
    I don't play the same game as you, where the rules are such that your religion is one side of the coin and Every Other Religion Plus All Forms of Atheism are the other side of the coin and flip. Why should I play this game? The rules are pathetic.
    One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
    -Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.

  10. #390

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by Muizer View Post
    Well by not believing anything, I'm at least avoiding believing the wrong thing! That must count for something
    I think thats called Pascal's Opt-Out.
    "When I die, I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like Fidel Castro, not screaming in terror, like his victims."

    My shameful truth.

  11. #391
    Nesimî's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Konstantiniyye
    Posts
    4,766

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Can't we select multiple things? I want to check them all, Diamat would be so proud of me.
    shum

  12. #392
    DaniCatBurger's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Page 216
    Posts
    820

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Blaise Pascal's Out still assumed that valid ontological grounds could be reached that was before 1755 or 1945.
    Last edited by DaniCatBurger; August 18, 2014 at 05:27 PM.
    שנאה היא לא ערך, גזענות היא לא הדרך




  13. #393
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex Magistrate

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    11,075

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by Phier View Post
    I think thats called Pascal's Opt-Out.
    Never heard of it. I came across "Pascal's Wager", but that doesn't answer what you should do when you have to choose between religions.
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  14. #394

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by Muizer View Post
    Never heard of it. I came across "Pascal's Wager", but that doesn't answer what you should do when you have to choose between religions.
    What it means is that Pascal's Wager usually is functionally defined between chosing between one religion(Christianity) and not that one religion and suffering that religion's consequences should you be wrong, and gaining the benefits should you be right. A gamble, as basics puts it. Or just opting out because not choosing that religion typically doesn't account for anything in every other religion in the world's history. It's just an argument in apologetic philosophy for the Christian framework that ignores everything not Christianity because it wants to.

    So we happily ignore it and opt out. Pascal's Opt-Out. The thing about gambling like this? You don't have to play.
    One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
    -Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.

  15. #395
    DaniCatBurger's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Page 216
    Posts
    820

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    You don't have to play = ethics without ontology (metaphysics, naturalism, materialism, etc.)
    Last edited by DaniCatBurger; August 18, 2014 at 05:45 PM.
    שנאה היא לא ערך, גזענות היא לא הדרך




  16. #396

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by DaniCatBurger View Post
    You don't have to play = ethics without ontology (metaphysics, naturalism, materialism, etc.)
    No. 'You don't have to play' in this context just means 'ethics without Pascal's Wager' and thus my ethics an ethical interest in it instead of purely being about my own self-interest and what happens to me after I die. Don't strawman this into something that makes no sense whatsoever just to make yourself look like you know why I make the decisions I do please.
    One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
    -Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.

  17. #397
    DaniCatBurger's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Page 216
    Posts
    820

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    I do not question your argument because it appears conclusive. My interest in your remark 'You don't have to play' has to do with some other texts*.

    Of course, I can't know why you make the decisions you do nor can I know what these decisions relate to or what their nature could be.

    *from analytical philosophy and a linguistic study



    Last edited by DaniCatBurger; August 18, 2014 at 08:07 PM.
    שנאה היא לא ערך, גזענות היא לא הדרך




  18. #398
    basics's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    11,280

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    " Circular reasoning: the bible authenticates the bible because Jesus authenticates the bible because the bible authenticates Jesus because Jesus authenticates the Bible and so on and on and on and on and on. It's a non argument. "

    Himster,

    It can't be circular reasoning if what the Bible says comes true. It is written that the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation. Is that true or false? To you probably false but to me and many others like me it was perfectly true. God drew me to it. God convicted me by it. And God put me on my knees to freely save me from what is to come. It was the most marvelous experience I have ever had so as they say, the proof is in the eating and it certainly was for me.

    " Nobody can know whether or not it happened,"

    Oh but they do, because there are sixty-six books in which the writers and others are witness to the veracity of Scripture. And, that doesn't include all the writers since who have had their conversion stories put into print. Bookshops, Christian or otherwise are full of them.

    " no different from red-necks being abducted in New Mexico, or the Yeti or any old nonsense anyone made up any old place any old time. There is no evidence for any of these things, even you don't know, "

    I don't see the relevence here because there is none.

    " you've had a few dreams (or what deluded people habitually call visions), well so have Hindus, so have Muslims, Mormons, Buddhists, etc. etc. their dreams are just as "real" as yours, they offer no distinguishing features, they're all the same. To believe one on such flimsy "evidence" one would have to believe all of them, or forfeit their intellectual integrity. It's as simple as that. "

    I have no doubt that they have dreams as I have no doubt that these dreams are real but the difference is that there are two powers involved here. One is of God, measured and verified by Scripture and the other of Satan which denies all Scripture, why? To keep people from believing that Jesus Christ is not only Saviour but the Judge of the world when the day comes when they have to give account of what they believed.

    My dreams led me straight to God because as Jesus said, it was the Father who drew me to Him exactly as the Scriptures tell. So, I experienced exactly as the Bible promises. How do you account for that? I mean the Gospel of Jesus Christ is and always will be what Jesus Christ not only did in my life but the lives of all them brought out of condemnantion into real freedom and contentment. That's why it is our obligation to tell of these things.

    " Willfull disbelief is a mis-characterization. It implies certain untruths, specifically, the untruth that your position holds any evidence to distinguish it from the infinity of religions that permeate the history, present and future of the Earth. Our position is the stark opposite: truth cannot be altered through will, the opposite of the religious position where dreams (that are willed into existence either consciously or unconsciously) are significant."

    No, it is not for as Paul succinctly writes, despite knowing that God created all things man wilfully denies it. They conjure up just about anything imaginable to replace God in their thoughts.

    " No it doesn't, it is the unsupportable assertion that there is life after death. An assertion is not a proof of anything."

    Well, since Jesus Christ came back from the dead is that not witness enough that there is life after death? But, in another place He demonstrated hell in the picture of two men, one rich and the other poor, the rich one in hell crying out for relief and the other in the bosom of Abraham. That man, Abraham, must have been alive to comfort the poor guy. At His transfiguration, John and Peter were witness to Moses and Elijah being present so how come if there is no life after death? You see in any court of law witnesses are the most important and whatever Jesus did it was always before at least two witnesses. So, yes these things did happen.

    " When the gamble involves infinitely sided dice of infinite number there is no point playing. The dice are already cast, there is no moment when the dice are not cast."

    For a man who is prepared to gamble on the impossible odds of evolution actually being true, I find your answer rather puzzling when what Jesus Christ offers you is completely free. If He is a liar then you'll still go to where you think, but if He is telling the truth, what then?

    " Well by not believing anything, I'm at least avoiding believing the wrong thing! That must count for something "

    Muizer,

    " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved." The alternative is to sit on the fence or not believe at all. Is that really your position?

    " I don't play the same game as you, where the rules are such that your religion is one side of the coin and Every Other Religion Plus All Forms of Atheism are the other side of the coin and flip. Why should I play this game? The rules are pathetic."

    Gaidin,

    What rules? Salvation is absolutely free. God does everything for you. All that's asked of you is that you seek Him in earnest. You alone are responsible for your destiny, no-one else whatever they believe.

    " Can't we select multiple things? I want to check them all, Diamat would be so proud of me."

    Nesimi,

    Well, if you want to see heaven there is only one Way and you have to be in that Way before you die because after that there is no heaven at all, as seen from the first chapters of Genesis on.

  19. #399
    Himster's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Dublin, The Peoples Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    9,838

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    It can't be circular reasoning if what the Bible says comes true.
    According to the bible.

    It was the most marvelous experience I have ever had so as they say, the proof is in the eating and it certainly was for me.
    The "proof" is in the dreaming in this case.


    Oh but they do, because there are sixty-six books in which the writers and others are witness to the veracity of Scripture.
    Again, circular reasoning: the bible doesn't prove the bible, the bible is a collection of claims, adding claims to those claims doesn't prove the prior claims.

    I don't see the relevence here because there is none.
    If your dreams are taken to be valid evidence then those who've had dreams about aliens, yetis, Hindu Gods, Allah etc. are all also true by the exact same level of "evidence".

    I have no doubt that they have dreams as I have no doubt that these dreams are real but the difference is that there are two powers involved here. One is of God, measured and verified by Scripture and the other of Satan which denies all Scripture, why? To keep people from believing that Jesus Christ is not only Saviour but the Judge of the world when the day comes when they have to give account of what they believed.
    There's no way for you to know that you are not being misled by some daemon tricking you into believing a false religion, or the possibility that you simply dreamt what you wanted to dream.

    My dreams led me straight to God because as Jesus said, it was the Father who drew me to Him exactly as the Scriptures tell. So, I experienced exactly as the Bible promises. How do you account for that?
    Wishful thinking, wilfull delusion, Thetans maliciously tricking you, daemons leading you away from "true" religion, Djinns, Melkhor the deceiver, Satan, etc. etc.

    Well, since Jesus Christ came back from the dead is that not witness enough that there is life after death?
    I've seen dozens of magicians and assistants coming "back" from the dead, it proves nothing except that human perspective is incredibly easily duped with tricks, illusions, lies and wishful thinking.

    But, in another place He demonstrated hell in the picture of two men, one rich and the other poor, the rich one in hell crying out for relief and the other in the bosom of Abraham. That man, Abraham, must have been alive to comfort the poor guy. At His transfiguration, John and Peter were witness to Moses and Elijah being present so how come if there is no life after death? You see in any court of law witnesses are the most important and whatever Jesus did it was always before at least two witnesses. So, yes these things did happen.
    So if two people said they saw a thousand foot dragon fly out of my butt you would automatically believe them? Well, sorry but that's stupid.

    For a man who is prepared to gamble on the impossible odds of evolution actually being true, I find your answer rather puzzling when what Jesus Christ offers you is completely free. If He is a liar then you'll still go to where you think, but if He is telling the truth, what then?
    Jesus doesn't offer anything for free: He demands that I sacrifice my most valued possession: my intellectual integrity. I wouldn't sacrifice tht for a billion tangible Euro, wy would I sacrifice my most valuable possession for an intangible after-life? That would be insane.

    " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved." The alternative is to sit on the fence or not believe at all. Is that really your position?
    That is the only rational position when confronted with unbelievable assertions like an afterlife or dragons or unicorns.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.
    -Betrand Russell

  20. #400
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex Magistrate

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    11,075

    Default Re: The Most Logical Religion

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved." The alternative is to sit on the fence or not believe at all. Is that really your position?
    I'm a tragic figure. I search for the devine by learning about the universe, and the more I do that, the less relevant existing religions become. Salvation? Well yes, religions offer that (and damnation), but picking your God isn't like shopping for the best deal eh?
    Last edited by Muizer; August 19, 2014 at 11:51 AM.
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •