A summary of a conservation yesterday between some hopelessly convinced individual who shall remain nameless, and myself:
He couldn't answer. I did nothing but simply question his own beliefs/dogma. Is arguing with apologists is often as mind-numbingly tedious as it is pointless? To think of all the paint in the world I could have watched dry, as trivial as that sounds, at least I would have gained something from that mundane exercise. >.>
Quote:Mr X: "Look Welsh cake, if you don't believe in Christ and acknowledge him as saviour you'll go to hell."
WC: "But what about babies, infants whose minds are too young to accommodate these beliefs? You're saying they'll go to hell too?"
Mr X: "No. Everyone will know the truth after the resurrection and confess Jesus is Lord and every knee shall bow in the afterlife."
WC: "So, if we're all destined to meet up with Jesus in the next life and have little choice but to acknowledge his existence, why the redundant "hell threat" in this life then?"
He couldn't answer. I did nothing but simply question his own beliefs/dogma. Is arguing with apologists is often as mind-numbingly tedious as it is pointless? To think of all the paint in the world I could have watched dry, as trivial as that sounds, at least I would have gained something from that mundane exercise. >.>
