it's pointless to present this argument to anyone who already believes in god, because they don't need proof of his existence: "well how come soooo many people followed jesus then??? he must have been the son of god for people to die in support of him" they might call it proof but it is obviously faith...you are right in saying that the normal standards of logic do not apply
( ... )
in presenting this to someone who already believes in god, you might be assuming that i'm trying to convince them that they need proof of his existance. that is extremely far from my intentions, and i think i made it clear probably 10 times too many in my post. i don't assume god exists, and i don't assume he doesn't exist. when i talk to someone about their religious beliefs, at no point do i allow my (potentially) conflicting ideas to get in the way of understanding their ways. i'm not trying to convince anyone that they are wrong, that would be incredibly unreasonable. i don't like it when people try to rub their religious beliefs on to me, and in turn, i refuse to do that to anyone else. i am in full agreement that anyone is free to believe in their religion in whatever way they need to. the main point that i seem to have been driving at with my post is that there seems to be a seemingly non-coincidental correlation between faith and ignorance, at least to some noticable degree. it could be any religion. faith is
( ... )
Comments 5
Reply
Reply
Just a thought.
Dinsky you should write disclaimers for law firms. I bet they'd pay you well.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment