...hahaha

[Marquis of Granby]

so i spose the logical question that follows is: supposing the evidence is sound and it is established and universally accepted that there was a man named jesus christ x amount of years ago, how can you be so confident in your faith that he was born of a virgin, could perform miracles and was the son of god?

i understand that you believe your god is the correct and only one, but there are people of different religions just as confident in their faith that their god is the right one. so are they deluded?

ps: i have purposefully tried not to let my own views slip into my questioning or my responses. it has been hard not to ridicule you, because in case you havent noticed - that is my nature

maths is a man-made construct to try and help us understand the world around us. i know you cant be saying that about the god you believe in but i would say you cant compare god to maths in that way.

im really curious, do you see yourself as a faithful person or do you feel you're privy to a divine truth that people of other/no religions arent? do you genuinely feel "this is what i beleive" when you talk about god and jesus or do you feel "this is what i know" because in the way you write it sounds as tho you take it all as absolute fact.

and one final final final question. suppose you are on your deathbed, and minutes before you die it is somehow revealed to you that god/s do not exist indefinitely or that the god you believed in was the wrong one. would you feel you'd wasted any part of your life and would it worry you (in the last minute of your life) if there was no afterlife?

 

[Dionysos]

The majority of Islamic people I have spoken with and listened to do not regard themselves like that, and many of them instead point out the similarities with the other Abrahamic faiths.

As for historicity, there are accounts of Jesus in antiquity, and he could be looked into like any historical figure, with care. We know that Augustus existed, but not everything written about Augustus is true (be that his contemporaries etc, later 'historians' in late antiquity, etc).

There may be an historical basis (or attestation, etc) for aspects of Jesus' life, but only faith can lead one to decide that he is the son of God, and that Christianity is the faith that is correct and true.

Since there are similar attestations for other prophets for different religions, and ancient writers wrote of many historical figures which a lot of scholars scratch their heads over trying to find out the truth behind the literary invention, it might not be fair to state that one is right, and the rest is bogus. It is your own personal belief and faith, which in this case it is, and I think that is partially what Jimbob was getting it when mentioning everything cancelling each other out, and questioning why not if it doesn't.

 

[Will Graham]

Math is an entirely human concept, it is simply a set of rules we use to describe the world. Knowing that math is correct is not the same as knowing God exists, at least to me

 

[Donald Trump]

There is evidence which proves Maths exists. God on the other hand.

 

[The Witch]

There is evidence which proves Maths exists. God on the other hand.

I'm gonna have to point you to my paragraph:
Look at the Big bang theory. We got here because of the big bang, but then you have to ask yourself what started it all before that? What created that very first thing that started everything? And not just in our galaxy. To me, the sole fact that there's always a cause for a reaction is one reason why I believe there is some kind of God.

maths is a man-made construct to try and help us understand the world around us. i know you cant be saying that about the god you believe in but i would say you cant compare god to maths in that way.

Math is an entirely human concept, it is simply a set of rules we use to describe the world. Knowing that math is correct is not the same as knowing God exists, at least to me

Well, not entirely. It's a human discovery not a human concept. Think of it like this, if there were intelligent life somewhere out there in deep deep space and they needed to make sure they have the same amount of offspring as they did when they left they would count their offspring. Making math a universal language. Human's discovered it, they didn't create it.

If something universal can exist(like physics/math) and we can't even touch, feel, or see the physical impact of it but we know it exists in some way--it's very much like God. You can't see or touch God or see a physical impact of him, but that doesn't mean he can't exist. I brought up to Jim about how something or someone started everything, and that's kinda what I'm getting at here.

so i spose the logical question that follows is: supposing the evidence is sound and it is established and universally accepted that there was a man named jesus christ x amount of years ago, how can you be so confident in your faith that he was born of a virgin, could perform miracles and was the son of god?

Well, besides having faith. I could use historical references of pagan and or Jewish historians trying to explain his miracles. Josephus ben Mattathias(Jewish Historian) wrote about how Jesus rose again three days later after he died. Lucian of Samosate scornfully mocked Christ and Christians when he referenced how Jesus was crucified because of Christ's claims. Cornelius Tacitus mentioned how Pilate crucified Jesus. Tallus wrote about how darkness fell upon the earth during the hours Christ died. The importance of Tallus' comments is that the reference shows that the Gospel account of the darkness that fell across the earth during Christ's crucifixion was well known and required a naturalistic explanation from non-Christians.

But on top of that, I think of it like this. Since Jesus really died on the cross and since Pilate really existed and did in fact condemn Jesus to the cross that would mean Jesus really did have a large following otherwise he had no crime against him.

To have as many followers as Jesus did that would mean he would have to show proof of him being God's son by performing the miracles he did, why else would so many pagans and jews start to follow him? especially in a time where doing so resulted in death?

The whole reason Jesus was crucified was because of how many people began to follow him as their king of kings. Now, how would Jesus win over so many followers in a time where saying someone else is your king is the worse crime you could do? By proving it to them through miracles. This was not a time where people were blind followers, they couldn't afford to do that, doing so would get them punished. Now ask yourself, what would make these people go against their society's laws and follow this man despite sure punishment? Jesus had to have proven it to them somehow and it couldn't have been something small, either--would words really be enough to make so many face a chance of death just because they wanted to follow Jesus?

I don't think so.

And since you asked me the question, I think those historical facts of people following Jesus despite the chance of punishment proves, to me, Jesus really did do the things the bible said he did. That's enough proof for me. I can understand that not being enough for anyone else, but it is for me.

i understand that you believe your god is the correct and only one, but there are people of different religions just as confident in their faith that their god is the right one. so are they deluded?

Not deluded. Misguided.

ps: i have purposefully tried not to let my own views slip into my questioning or my responses. it has been hard not to ridicule you, because in case you havent noticed - that is my nature

I know.

im really curious, do you see yourself as a faithful person or do you feel you're privy to a divine truth that people of other/no religions arent? do you genuinely feel "this is what i beleive" when you talk about god and jesus or do you feel "this is what i know" because in the way you write it sounds as tho you take it all as absolute fact.

Well, I'm not "privy to a divine truth"--I just see facts in History that can prove certain things while other people try to say anything to explain it otherwise and how it's got nothing to do with Jesus. It is what I believe, I couldn't be speaking about this if I didn't believe in it. I do have faith he exists, my faith is just so ardent it is fact for me.

The majority of Islamic people I have spoken with and listened to do not regard themselves like that, and many of them instead point out the similarities with the other Abrahamic faiths.

I wasn't speaking about the followers of Islam. I was talking about what the Qur'an says.

As for historicity, there are accounts of Jesus in antiquity, and he could be looked into like any historical figure, with care. We know that Augustus existed, but not everything written about Augustus is true (be that his contemporaries etc, later 'historians' in late antiquity, etc).

There may be an historical basis (or attestation, etc) for aspects of Jesus' life, but only faith can lead one to decide that he is the son of God, and that Christianity is the faith that is correct and true.

I hope you'll read my response to Jim. My answers for that are there.

Since there are similar attestations for other prophets for different religions, and ancient writers wrote of many historical figures which a lot of scholars scratch their heads over trying to find out the truth behind the literary invention, it might not be fair to state that one is right, and the rest is bogus. It is your own personal belief and faith, which in this case it is, and I think that is partially what Jimbob was getting it when mentioning everything cancelling each other out, and questioning why not if it doesn't.

Well, there is no historical documents or proof that Muhammad existed. Muhammad claimed to have been friends with Jesus Christ, which we know can't be true because Jesus came way way before Muhammad. But I'm curious, what other religious figure is there proof that they existed?

 

[Big Casino]

:tldr:

 

[The Witch]

I'm sorry Lewis.

Blame Jimmy. It's his fault.

 

[Big Casino]

i do blame jimmy

 

[The Witch]

Good lad.

 

[Marquis of Granby]

Well, not entirely. It's a human discovery not a human concept. Think of it like this, if there were intelligent life somewhere out there in deep deep space and they needed to make sure they have the same amount of offspring as they did when they left they would count their offspring. Making math a universal language. Human's discovered it, they didn't create it.

you have to believe that. but i would argue that you are most definitely wrong. believing things like this downplays the incredible intelligence of (albeit some) human beings. different cultures created different systems for quantifying and calculating. we call this maths. much like language.

Well, besides having faith. I could use historical references of pagan and or Jewish historians trying to explain his miracles. Josephus ben Mattathias(Jewish Historian) wrote about how Jesus rose again three days later after he died. Lucian of Samosate scornfully mocked Christ and Christians when he referenced how Jesus was crucified because of Christ's claims. Cornelius Tacitus mentioned how Pilate crucified Jesus. Tallus wrote about how darkness fell upon the earth during the hours Christ died. The importance of Tallus' comments is that the reference shows that the Gospel account of the darkness that fell across the earth during Christ's crucifixion was well known and required a naturalistic explanation from non-Christians.

But on top of that, I think of it like this. Since Jesus really died on the cross and since Pilate really existed and did in fact condemn Jesus to the cross that would mean Jesus really did have a large following otherwise he had no crime against him.

To have as many followers as Jesus did that would mean he would have to show proof of him being God's son by performing the miracles he did, why else would so many pagans and jews start to follow him? especially in a time where doing so resulted in death?

The whole reason Jesus was crucified was because of how many people began to follow him as their king of kings. Now, how would Jesus win over so many followers in a time where saying someone else is your king is the worse crime you could do? By proving it to them through miracles. This was not a time where people were blind followers, they couldn't afford to do that, doing so would get them punished. Now ask yourself, what would make these people go against their society's laws and follow this man despite sure punishment? Jesus had to have proven it to them somehow and it couldn't have been something small, either--would words really be enough to make so many face a chance of death just because they wanted to follow Jesus?

I don't think so.

again, we suppose jesus did exist and was crucified. many people were at that time. that does not prove he performed miracles. and while people wrote about his miracles remember that at this point heaven and god had watched indifferently for 4000ish years (according to the bible) as humans had been utter utter cunts to each other. then it decided to send jesus christ to a mostly illiterate, uneducated part of the world, not china where they could already read and write etc, but israel. we have magicians and tricksters now do you consider them to be miracle workers?

do you see any miracles being performed in our modern world?

if you are illiterate and uneducated im sure a magic trick could seem like a miracle.

also have you ever heard of chinese whispers? pssssssst jesus fed 4 people with a loaf of bread and 4 fish. pssssssssst jesus fed 10 people with 10 fish and 2 loaves of bread. psssssssst jesus fed 100 people with 12 fish and a loaf of bread...........................psssssssst jesus fed 4000 people with a loaf of bread and a fish. you get the point.

And since you asked me the question, I think those historical facts of people following Jesus despite the chance of punishment proves, to me, Jesus really did do the things the bible said he did. That's enough proof for me. I can understand that not being enough for anyone else, but it is for me.

if you can truly understand that it is likely to be insufficient for people then it cant be enough proof for you. so either you said that to make it seem more like youre not preaching or you have doubts about what you think you know.

Not deluded. Misguided.

but wrong nonetheless?

Well, I'm not "privy to a divine truth"--I just see facts in History that can prove certain things while other people try to say anything to explain it otherwise and how it's got nothing to do with Jesus. It is what I believe, I couldn't be speaking about this if I didn't believe in it. I do have faith he exists, my faith is just so ardent it is fact for me.

well it boils down to the quality of your evidence or facts. "john said that paul said that peter said that 200 years ago tim said he'd met jim" that sorta thing. i dont agree that people will say anything to explain otherwise in fact it seems to be the opposite. religious people will justify any old tripe fairytale in the name of jesus or whatever their prophet/saviour's name happens to be. i think i asked you if you had given this serious thought or you just blindly accept it all and it seems like you want to believe youve given it thought but you said yourself your faith is so strong that you believe every part of it to be fact so you cant be reasoned with on that - not that i was trying to reason with you or debate it

a faith based fact cant be a fact at all. thats the nature of faith isnt it?

do you think if you werent brought up as a christian you would still be one?

what do you believe will happen to me when i die?

 

[Harlequin]

Jim.. are you out of your mind?

 

[Marquis of Granby]

AM KAAAAAAAAAAAAARAZZZZZZZZZAY!

 

[Harlequin]

 

[Big Casino]

i dont know why either of you are so adamant to rty and prove eachother right or wrong.

Believe what you want and let others get on with it foo's!

 

[Marquis of Granby]

let others get on with it

thats why.

 

[Harlequin]

But it's the job of every Christian to force.. sorry persuade people into the faith.

 

[Will Graham]

Just because we do not know what caused/happened before the Big Bang, does not mean we are bound to ascribe it to a deity. Scientists don't know why the big peanuts rise to the top in those little bags, should we assume this is a phenomenon directly influenced by God?

We can observe math in day to day life, directly, and it is simply used as a method to describe. Just because it is universal, does not mean it always existed. In English a bird is called a bird, in Irish an éan. Different cultures used different terms to quantify the same thing, it's a natural human thing to want to quantify, to make sense of the world

Also, there are many different types of numerical system, binary, hexadecimal, decimal etc.

It is simply a means to an end, if I have a single item I would want a word to signify a single item. If I had double that, I would want to come up with a word to describe twice as many. Saying math was always there to be discovered is the same as saying fashionable socks were always there to be discovered

 

[The Witch]

Just because we do not know what caused/happened before the Big Bang, does not mean we are bound to ascribe it to a deity. Scientists don't know why the big peanuts rise to the top in those little bags, should we assume this is a phenomenon directly influenced by God?

The later sentence in that paragraph has nothing to do with what's said earlier. Comparing the two is just not possible.

Something always comes from somewhere or someone. Whether it's a deity or not goes unanswered. And I wasn't specifically talking about our galaxy's big bang. I meant the start of the entire universe... every planet and star of every galaxy... what was point number one and how did it happen? That's the question every atheist/religious person has to ask themselves. For all we know it was God, no one can say. I brought that up because I think the sole fact that there's always a cause for a reaction in relation to how the entire universe came to be means there could be a God.

Something can't be created from nothing. It always takes something. So where did it begin?

We can observe math in day to day life, directly, and it is simply used as a method to describe. Just because it is universal, does not mean it always existed. In English a bird is called a bird, in Irish an éan. Different cultures used different terms to quantify the same thing, it's a natural human thing to want to quantify, to make sense of the world

No, math has always existed--physics is proof of that. All it took was whether or not there was an intelligent enough lifeform to discover it.

Discovery and Creation are two totally different things. While humans discovered math we didn't create it. In our galaxy--humans were the intelligent lifeforms that discovered it but if there are any other thinking beings out there they are indeed using math in just as many ways as we are. If they didn't get it from us... that means it's not a human concept but rather, it's universal.

It is simply a means to an end, if I have a single item I would want a word to signify a single item. If I had double that, I would want to come up with a word to describe twice as many. Saying math was always there to be discovered is the same as saying fashionable socks were always there to be discovered

No. That's just not right--at all. Math exists with or without humans. It exists in physics and it will exist for any other living/thinking creature in any galaxy in the universe... whether or not someone is there to use it doesn't matter. If I turn away from an object to where I can't see it anymore, the object doesn't disappear does it? does that object stop existing? No.

Unless you're an Existentialist. Still, that's just a theory.

The earth could be desolated in a massive meteor and all humans were wiped off the face of the earth with no proof of our existence being left behind but if there is another planet with intelligent life on it--they will have math... meaning it does always exist with or without us.

you have to believe that. but i would argue that you are most definitely wrong. believing things like this downplays the incredible intelligence of (albeit some) human beings. different cultures created different systems for quantifying and calculating. we call this maths. much like language.

It's got nothing to do with what I believe.
Math is a universal language because the principles and foundations of math are the same everywhere around the world(or universe). Ten plus ten equals twenty if you write it as Arabic numerals 10 + 10 = 20 or Roman numerals X + X = XX. The concept of 20 items is the same no matter where you are in the world or universe.

When I first found out that Math was a universal language(or notation) I was about 11 or 12 and I had watched the Jodie Foster film "CONTACT"--a film where scientist use SETI to find messages from significant lifeforms in the form of prime numbers -- Jodie's character explained other life forms would do so because math is a universal language. I asked my mom and dad how that could be true(I was 11 after all ) and they gave me the example that if an "alien" on another planet in a far off galaxy needs to see if they have the same amount of offspring they will use math to do so.

They might have different words, symbols, and systems for their math but it's still math. 1 egg to them will be 1 egg to us. Two space ships to them will be two space ships to us as well. Whether or not they call "two" another word and write it out differently does not matter. Because the aliens will still be using math--proving that math is a universal language/notation. So it's not what I believe. It's what science shows is a fact. If there are intelligent lifeforms out there in other galaxies on other planets they will encounter math one way or another. Whether it's them counting their offspring or getting measurements for their space ships or homes--they will undoubtedly use math to do so.

Just look at animals on earth. If math is a human concept that exists just so we(humans) can make sense of things... then why do mother birds count their eggs? why do mother wolves count their pups?

Any professor in a math course in college will tell you the exact same thing that I am. It is not a belief system... it's a universal language.

again, we suppose jesus did exist and was crucified. many people were at that time. that does not prove he performed miracles. and while people wrote about his miracles remember that at this point heaven and god had watched indifferently for 4000ish years (according to the bible) as humans had been utter utter cunts to each other. then it decided to send jesus christ to a mostly illiterate, uneducated part of the world, not china where they could already read and write etc, but israel. we have magicians and tricksters now do you consider them to be miracle workers?

Of course his crucifixion doesn't prove he performed miracles by itself. It proves that he had a criminal act behind his name and that the courts condemned him to the cross to die and pay for his "crimes". That's what that proves. However, the crime he had tagged to him is what tells me he performed miracles.

You say these uneducated peoples of those countries were easy to fool with trickery. You think a man(Jesus) can mislead people with his "tricks". Jesus' miracles or "tricks" include healing a paralyzed man, raising the dead/again/, healing blind and the mute, etc...

Those sorts of tricks are what people followed Jesus for. Those tricks are what won him a large enough following of people to make the empire start to get worried. These people who Jesus' had performed miracles on/with/for didn't know him... so they weren't apart of his "tricks" either. It wasn't like Jesus said "Hey, friend go act like your blind for your whole life so I can trick people into thinking I cured you" What I'm saying is, for Jesus to have successfully played out his trickery it would have to include that he knew the strangers he performed them on... and he didn't know the paralyzed man... the dead son or dead daughter... nor the blind and mute folk he healed.

They saw him perform his miracles and they followed him. Again, during this time, following "tricksters" like you say Jesus could have been is pretty unlikely. Those people knew what it meant to do something like following a new savior--they new the dangers in yet they still followed him. It would take some seriously heavy convincing to get these skeptics and fearful people to do so and do it so boldly against the roman courts.

You can believe that these people were stupid and were easily fooled but I'm going to believe that these people knew what they were risking (knew not to cause a problem or they'd be punished most definitely for it)... in yet they decided to risk their life to continue to follow him. Why? because they had solid reasons to see Jesus as their king of kings.

(And the whole earth darkening during Jesus' death is more than enough proof for me that Jesus was a miracle man. )

do you see any miracles being performed in our modern world?

Yes I do.

if you are illiterate and uneducated im sure a magic trick could seem like a miracle.

Can you tell me how making a man who had been paralyzed being able to walk again at the sound of Jesus' words can be a trick? Jesus didn't know this man...(nor did he know the others he performed miracles on)... so how can he play his tricks?

also have you ever heard of chinese whispers? pssssssst jesus fed 4 people with a loaf of bread and 4 fish. pssssssssst jesus fed 10 people with 10 fish and 2 loaves of bread. psssssssst jesus fed 100 people with 12 fish and a loaf of bread...........................psssssssst jesus fed 4000 people with a loaf of bread and a fish. you get the point.

You have every right to that, and I see your point. But I still don't think groups of people would choose death or criminal punishment at the mere rumors of others. It started somewhere.

if you can truly understand that it is likely to be insufficient for people then it cant be enough proof for you. so either you said that to make it seem more like youre not preaching or you have doubts about what you think you know.

It is enough proof for me. I can know something and not force it down someone's throat. If I didn't believe in what I was saying I wouldn't be wasting my time discussing it in a spam section on a forum.

Just because I can accept that others don't believe something that doesn't mean I don't wholeheartedly believe in it. It's like you and conor saying math isn't universal and that me accepting your choice in opinion on the matter somehow makes me less sure about math actually being a universal language... when it doesn't. You guys obviously don't believe what I'm saying but I know sure as heck it is. I'm just respecting that I don't have a right to shove anything down someone's throat no matter if it's true or not. It's their decision and choice and I can respect that. So when I say I can understand why something isn't enough for someone that's not me having a lack of assurance in what I'm saying, it's the whole... hakuna matata sort of thing.

but wrong nonetheless?

Wrong for me... yes.
I know what you're getting at here. You're going to say how Muslims/Buddhist/others think I'm wrong in my religion just as much as I do about theirs... but so what? It's free will. That means free will to mess up or do something right. I believe that Christianity is the true religion and I pray everyone will one day see the light on their own terms. That might sound corny or crazy or a bit of both to others, but as a Christian it's all I can do. I've got to accept that others have a God given right to free will... whether it's a bad or good choice.

So yes, by my book, they are wrong religions(at least with Scientology and Islam) and I'd be lying if I said I didn't pray for those people of those religions to one day see Jesus as their true savior. Jesus is life and I want everyone to have a chance at eternal life.

My dad doesn't exactly believe in a religion (he grew up in a jehovah witness house though) but I still pray that he'll find a way to God. I'm not disrespecting my father when I pray for him to come to Jesus I'm just praying for the better. You or anyone else may say it's belittling for me to do so to someone else as if they aren't smart enough or whatever... but my only intention in praying for their souls is that I want them to have happiness and a shot at eternal life... whether your Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or Buddhist... if your intentions are pure I see no problem with it. My muslim friends might pray that I become a muslim but I wouldn't take that offensively, it'd show me they care(even if I believed their religion to be wrong).

It's like when someone you know wants to commit suicide and you say to them "I hope you live a long and healthy life"--is that a bad thought even if the other person doesn't want it? No. It's the same for religion. If someone wants to do something positive and wish something good for me, I won't turn it down or take it negatively.

So, Yes. I think their religions are wrong. But that doesn't mean I kick them and force my religion down their throat.

well it boils down to the quality of your evidence or facts. "john said that paul said that peter said that 200 years ago tim said he'd met jim" that sorta thing. i dont agree that people will say anything to explain otherwise in fact it seems to be the opposite. religious people will justify any old tripe fairytale in the name of jesus or whatever their prophet/saviour's name happens to be.

(I'm not speaking about anyone I personally know here, but more so about debates I've seen over religion.)

We're sort of forced to justify our religion and specifically Jesus. Atheist have this tendency to want to go to any length to disprove a God or religion... and when they beat us over the head about how delusional we are we can do one of two things a.) shrug our shoulders and let them have their opinion or b.) try to inform them why we have faith... both in which atheist get angry about.

i think i asked you if you had given this serious thought or you just blindly accept it all and it seems like you want to believe youve given it thought but you said yourself your faith is so strong that you believe every part of it to be fact so you cant be reasoned with on that - not that i was trying to reason with you or debate it

I have given it thought, Jim. I did not believe in a God or even knew who Jesus was until I was 12 or 13. When I first heard of Jesus I did give it thought. I asked questions and I looked for answers. After giving it thought I felt it was right. Now, 8 years later, my faith is stronger than ever and it's through my faith that I take it as fact.

I can be reasoned with. I'm just not hearing anything conclusive.

Can you assure me 110% that you know for a fact that there is no deity or an after life? No. Just like I can't pin point you to physical/inarguable proof that there's a God. Both are opinions based on faith.

a faith based fact cant be a fact at all. thats the nature of faith isnt it?

It's not fact to you. But it is a fact of life for me. It's fact that I live in the south but just because you don't doesn't mean I don't, right?

It's the same thing.

Who has faith in something without holding it as a personal fact? I get what you're saying and I guess I'm doing a poor job expressing my answer on a forum. I've seen miracles and it's that reason I see it as fact. The faith factor comes in with the part of the whole debate about being able to physically prove God--that we need faith for. But once you have that faith you take it as a fact.

Say I have faith in my boyfriend that he'll never cheat on me, we end up getting married and growing old together and as it turns out he never ever cheated--that's faith & fact.

do you think if you werent brought up as a christian you would still be one?

I wasn't brought up a Christian. The first time I encountered religion was when I was 12 or 13 and I was reading a series I didn't know was religious. My parents never sat me down and told me to be a Christian and I've never even been inside of a church. So to answer your question, if by some weird chance I never read the bible or encountered religions before and then I all of a sudden learned all of them... yes I would still be a Christian.

what do you believe will happen to me when i die?

I don't know, Jim. That's for God to know. It's His job, he'll judge your heart. I can't condemn you to hell solely because you don't believe in God--because, I'm a sinner by the bibles standards as well and I have no right to cast the first stone.

I hope you'll be in heaven, though.

Can I ask you a few questions? I know this has been questions for me but I just wanna ask a few things. Of course, if you don't want to that's just fine.

Let's say there isn't a God and every religion is wrong--what harm does believing in an afterlife do to me?

So I go thinking the rest of my life that there's an afterlife and when I die there ends up being nothing... so what? As long as I didn't commit mass murder to prove a religion or harm others verbally/physically... why does it matter if I went to my death bed believing it? If someone wants to have a happy ending in their mind, let them die with it don't stomp on them. It's like looking in the eyes of your war pal and knowing s/he's gonna die... what do you say? Try and comfort them... or give them the brutal scary truth? Most people will choose the comforting one. If there isn't an after life... why does everyone who doesn't believe in one have to make everyone else see it their way too?

Another question...
After you've lived a very long and healthy life, you pass over--and to your surprise there you are at gates of Heaven and you're in the presence of the highest judge of all--God. What do you do?

Honestly think about it.
Between the two choices, being an atheist or religious person has two "bad" outcomes at the end of your life, one outcome is worse than the other.

Live a life as a religious person and the worse thing that happens at the end of your life is that you don't get the afterlife because it's "not real"(but then again what do you care... you're dead and have no thinking mind anymore so you can't comprehend the lie you lived.) So virtually, there's no negative for living religiously while alive.

However, live a life as someone who doesn't believe and you die...you get judged.

At least if you live as a religious person you stick to the safe side and lose nothing... as apposed to the atheist view; you're out of luck in both instances if there is or isn't a God.

Believing in a God is a win-win whether it's true or not. Being an atheist is a lose-win--are those odds you'd like to take?

(this isn't my personally philosophy, I'm just trying to put it in a way where others can understand)

Phew, that was a monster of a post. It's around 3000+ words. !

i dont know why either of you are so adamant to rty and prove eachother right or wrong.

Believe what you want and let others get on with it foo's!

Honestly, I'm with the notion of letting others believe what they want. But he's asking me questions and I want to answer. We're both not arguing... just discussing.

 

[The Witch]

Oh, and.

The Killer Whale

 

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

the advantage of living life as an atheist is that you don't care about sinning, and sinning is undoubtedly what makes things fun. i don't mean like murder and all that, but being 'immoral' as some people would say, is interesting and exciting. i think it's worth risking burning in hell for