RE: Why Christianity?
July 31, 2015 at 3:58 am
(This post was last modified: July 31, 2015 at 4:11 am by Shuffle.)
(July 31, 2015 at 2:59 am)Aoi Magi Wrote: 1) (when i was specifically discussing hinduism), "I don't lose anything for not believing in hinduism even if it is right, but the risk is just too much (in christianity)".
I am sensing a Pascal Wager argument in that... and I am not happy!
Aoi Magi Wrote:2) The bible proves itself through it's prophecies which the other religions do not. (radio silence came after I asked how much she actually knew about prophecies in other religions)You already stole what I was going to say in your parentheses! The Argument from Prophecies is one of the weakest ones in a theist's arsenal of bronze-aged apologetics. This is because the handful of alleged prophecies are just pitiful. Some include: there will be wars, there will be unbelievers, their will be mockers, the Jews will have their own holy land, lose it, and then get it again! The last one is the only one that deserves a mention, but you don't need a God to predict vague future historic events.
(July 31, 2015 at 3:38 am)MysticKnight Wrote: One thing I find unique in my religion is how Quran coupled with it's divinely appointed interpreters (the family of Mohammad) explained the name/face of God. This divine knowledge and emphasis seems to be missing in all religions. I can make a thread about this. Another thing is how the holy book emphasizes on that God is "The Living", while philosophy just caught up with this aspect of God's unique status and proof of unique divinity, as well, as the nature of creation with respect to the Creator. Another thing is the sequence of Suratal Ikhlaas is mind boggling how philosophically it flows.
So let me get this straight. The reasons your religion is unique is because your book and some people described someone inside of the book, some philosophy gibberish inside of the book, and some pages inside the book.
In all seriousness, however, your factual basis on which you hold most of your beliefs can not be the book in which you hold most of your beliefs. For example, if I say I believe in the Three Little Pigs, I can not point to the title of the book and say, "Proof!" It's dishonest and silly to do so in that context and in the context of your post.
Your post could be evidence that your religion is more unique, but that says nothing about its superior validity when it is confronted by other religions.