Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: October 31, 2026, 7:17 pm
Thread Rating:
|
How to save your children from hell
|
So how, exactly, does God know that She's NOT a brain in a vat?
 "A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence." — David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
I read your first few posts in the linked thread. At first glance it looks like your thoughts are nearly in line with christianity but then you cut through that cloth with great accuracy. I felt like I was watching art being made, bravo
 Indeed, your line of reasoning puts the first and third options on nearly equal playing fields. If I were to base my faith in christianity on it, I would have no qualms. Fortunately though, there are so many other reasons to disbelieve the bible. 
The best way teach them that all the Abrahamic religions are bullshit and none of it exists the end.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe> (March 26, 2015 at 10:21 pm)urlawyer Wrote: So the question then becomes why would god even allow the babies to come into existence if they're just going to go to hell? Yet again, the good colonel provides: Quote:I would not for my life destroy one star of human hope, but I want it so that when a poor woman rocks the cradle and sings a lullaby to the dimpled darling, she will not be compelled to believe that ninety-nine chances in a hundred she is raising kindling wood for hell.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
(March 27, 2015 at 1:29 am)urlawyer Wrote: I read your first few posts in the linked thread. At first glance it looks like your thoughts are nearly in line with christianity but then you cut through that cloth with great accuracy. I felt like I was watching art being made, bravo Thank you for your kind words. If one is going to argue about some issue, it usually works best to take the ideas seriously and see the implications of them. I would not put the first and third options on equal footing. But when viewing the matter in isolation (i.e., not considering other aspects of the Bible and the reasons to reject it), I can see how one might. Certainly, the least respectable position, intellectually speaking, is the second one. Picking and choosing based on personal preference is really just using personal preference as a guide, and only bothering with the Bible when it coincides with what one already wants. It is an intellectually dishonest approach, in which one pretends that one is using the Bible as a guide, but is really just going with personal preference. That may be "nicer" in practice (or not, depending), but it is intellectually despicable. If the Bible is just another book written by people, as opposed to one that was guided by the hand of God, one should take the third approach and just toss it and stop pretending. "A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence." — David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
Quote:Certainly, the least respectable position, intellectually speaking, is the second one. Picking and choosing based on personal preference is really just using personal preference as a guide, and only bothering with the Bible when it coincides with what one already wants. It is an intellectually dishonest approach, in which one pretends that one is using the Bible as a guide, but is really just going with personal preference. These are actually the biggest reasons I strayed from christianity. Once I started questioning it I found new evidence and ideas that just totally ripped my previous notions to shreds. I realized I had effectively wasted 20 years of critical thought growth and grieve for what I have lost. Although I don't regret who I became, I still have to deal with my old christian subconscious and wonder how I would have turned out if my parents didn't indoctrinate me like they did. Indeed I would agree with you that the second option is the most despicable to take. Especially since it gets you in the mind set that it's okay to make up convoluted excuses to cover your ass.  (March 24, 2015 at 2:38 am)robvalue Wrote: You are right, that would be the logical conclusion for christians. It has actually happened before as well, a woman killed her kid to "send it to heaven". Luckily most christians don't really believe it and would rather risk their child going to hell. Ah, the joys of cognitive dissonance. You show them the logical conclusions of their wacky beliefs, and they start backpeddling, acting like they don't believe those things... ...until the next conversation, where they'll totally say they believe those things, until someone walks them through it, again. You think that'd be a warning flag. 
It buggers my mind more than anything, the dissidence. It's so powerful. It's more powerful than god!
I mean really... christians cannot truly believe in hell. If they did, would they ever have children? Would they really put anyone into that situation where there's any chance at all they may end up getting tortured forever? If they really do believe in proper hell, and have children regardless, they are gambling with someone else's eternal suffering. That is beyond messed up. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)
