Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
What if you're wrong?
porgie
Member Posts: 1,516
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
Comments
Rule #2: I am never wrong.
Rule #3: If you think that Rule #2 is applicable, then refer to Rule #1.
It's hard to hold someone accountable for something when you make everything so damned arbitrary. It makes saving your soul a crap shoot at best.
===============================
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
*sigh* we need to get Pascal's wager stickied in this forum so we dont have to keep having this debate once a fortnight.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/wager.html
But from my personal viewpoint. Why would an omnipotent, omniescent creator want me to believe in him "just in case" ?
Wouldnt that invalidate the whole point of faith completely. A truly just being would respect my decision to use my inteligence to question that which I can neither prove nor refute.
And if they dont... screw them... I will burn in hell with a smile on my face knowing I am more just than my creator.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
To put a whole set of rules and variables into the equation that need to be met just right and then place those on a group of creatures with questionable if any meaningful intelligence just doesn't seem fair.
I tend not to think very highly of God, mostly because he seems to often act like a petulant 5 year old.
Too true. I was commenting more on the whole "If you don't be my bestest friend, you're not invited to my birthday party" attitude that seems to exemplify 99% of Gawds decrees. Moreso OT than NT, but still.
Too true. I was commenting more on the whole "If you don't be my bestest friend, you're not invited to my birthday party" attitude that seems to exemplify 99% of Gawds decrees. Moreso OT than NT, but still.
I lawled... On topic now, I never really seen or heard of that person Dawkins (or I just don't pay attention to anything) but he seems like a nice guy. I watched the interview when hes on CNN, he also seems very intelligent / smart. If I'm wrong, eh maybe they have cooler parties in other realms besides cloud city.I'm up to the challange, prove me wrong about god! But to do so, you need to kill me first. Not to get a little off topic, even more, but I like it when people say "I'm Christian." Then you saw them no more then 30 seconds ago swearing like a sailor and taking some shots (drink, not bag bag / needle).... Yeah ok. I find it very funny how people think, "I'm christian so if I ask for forgiveness it's good." No, it shouldn't (or doesn't, not sure about how that works) work that way. You can't up hold bit's and pieces of the bible or your holy document. All or none, take your pick.
Well I'm done... I'm going to live how I want till the end, regardless of me being correct or incorrect on my life. Gogo free will!
I like how he doesn't actually answer her question. "What if I'm wrong? Well what if you're wrong" I thought this guy was a doctor..this is the best he can come up with?
Dawkins is an arrogant fool. What more can I say about a man who refuses to believe in God but gives credence to a theory that proposes that all life origionated from self replicating clay crystals?
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Well, in all fairness, the same could be said for the proselytizer of any belief system.
Personally, I am fond on Neil Gaimen's idea in American Gods. Wherein all Gods(essess) existed, based on peoples belief in them, and as peoples faith/belief/whatever waned, the gods power waned.
Well, in all fairness, the same could be said for the proselytizer of any belief system.
Personally, I am fond on Neil Gaimen's idea in American Gods. Wherein all Gods(essess) existed, based on peoples belief in them, and as peoples faith/belief/whatever waned, the gods power waned.
Sorta like how in the movie Elf Santa Claus lost his power because people didn't believe in him?
With Christianity, there is no need for people to believe in God. Whether or not people believe in God does not change the fact that he exists...So there's no room for such a belief in Christianity.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Like I said, I don't know alot about the man, but I do not critize any belief or lack of, because any one of us could be right or wrong. I really hope FSM is correct... I would laugh my ass off. I'm not attacking you, or any one else, because I hate arguing (I like talking, but when we someone starts to throw chairs, that's when I leave).
We all most select our path and stick by it, what ever makes you happy and that is all that should matter. If some one say's "You're wrong 100%." Just say "Ok." It's not worth the energy getting mad or frustrated, just move on. Life is way too short to have petty arguements and fights over little things.
If you feel that YOU are correct, then don't let any one take that away.
Well, in all fairness, the same could be said for the proselytizer of any belief system.
Personally, I am fond on Neil Gaimen's idea in American Gods. Wherein all Gods(essess) existed, based on peoples belief in them, and as peoples faith/belief/whatever waned, the gods power waned.
Sorta like how in the movie Elf Santa Claus lost his power because people didn't believe in him?
With Christianity, there is no need for people to believe in God. Whether or not people believe in God does not change the fact that he exists...So there's no room for such a belief in Christianity.
Now I don't know anything about self replicating clay crystals but im pretty sure when lightning strikes clay it has the rare chance of creating a simple life form, and I think a similar thing happens with sand. Now I could very well be wrong. . .
On Time? On Target? Never Quit?
Well, in all fairness, the same could be said for the proselytizer of any belief system.
Personally, I am fond on Neil Gaimen's idea in American Gods. Wherein all Gods(essess) existed, based on peoples belief in them, and as peoples faith/belief/whatever waned, the gods power waned.
Sorta like how in the movie Elf Santa Claus lost his power because people didn't believe in him?
With Christianity, there is no need for people to believe in God. Whether or not people believe in God does not change the fact that he exists...So there's no room for such a belief in Christianity.
Now I don't know anything about self replicating clay crystals but im pretty sure when lightning strikes clay it has the rare chance of creating a simple life form, and I think a similar thing happens with sand. Now I could very well be wrong. . .
Upon looking for something about your clay and lightning scenario, I found this interesting note on talkorigins...
Claim: "The most primitive cells are too complex to have come together by chance."
Response: "Nobody knows what the most primitive cells looked like. All the cells around today are the product of billions of years of evolution."
I love how that is just assumed and therefore it deemed is an acceptable response.
Found a synopses of it written for a lecture about the origin of life by Robert M Hazen, Ph.D Harvard University
"Clay as Life: Fine-grained crystals of clay might, all by themselves, have been the very first life forms on Earth. According to this hypothesis, self-replicating clay crystals evolved the ability to manufacture complex biomolecules such as RNA, which eventually out-competed their clay cousins to become the dominant form of life on the planet"
It doesn't say anything about lightning though...so I'm not sure if that's a part of the theory.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
There is no need to answer the question, it is a nonsensical question.
What if your wrong about the prophets and Islam is the 'true' religion. As a video response said, what if there are giant penguins on the planet of mars that will kill us all if we dont beleive in them ?
By asking "what if you are wrong" that lady is assuming that she is right which, as R.D. pointed out, is entirely baseless in this world of tens of thousands of religions.
If I'm wrong then I don't know what happens, but at least I'll know that I've lived a good life.
There, see how I answered that? I didn't just ask you the same question back. There's nothing nonsensical about asking such an unrepentent atheist about the implications of his own death.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
There is no need to answer the question, it is a nonsensical question.
What if your wrong about the prophets and Islam is the 'true' religion. As a video response said, what if there are giant penguins on the planet of mars that will kill us all if we dont beleive in them ?
By asking "what if you are wrong" that lady is assuming that she is right which, as R.D. pointed out, is entirely baseless in this world of tens of thousands of religions.
If I'm wrong then I don't know what happens, but at least I'll know that I've lived a good life.
There, see how I answered that? I didn't just ask you the same question back. There's nothing nonsensical about asking such an unrepentent atheist about the implications of his own death.
Well, you didnt actually answer anything, you just shruged your shoulders and said "ohh well, shit happens" Its not particularly an answer, there is no proper answer though, as its a nonsensical question.
EDIT: You also assumed that athiest dont live a good life.
I didn't assume that atheists don't live good lives at all, I didn't even imply that.
And I answered the question directly, and for myself...if I'm wrong about what I believe, then I don't know what is right, and could go to whatever hell is, whatever heaven is, or whatever nothingness is...Dawkins dodged the question entirely by simply asking the girl the same question she asked him. If he had a set of balls he would have answered truthfully.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
I mean, the answer is quite clear isn't it? If you're wrong, you're screwed.
Dawkins is no more arrogant then any other christian, he is simply just as passionatly about his belief. He is no more arrogant then any priest or follower.
There is nothing foolish about not believing in God. especialy considering the serious lack of evidence that support the existance of a God, let alone the Bible. In fact, the Bible contains just as many miracles and wonders as the average fairy tale.
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
I think you need to stop assuming what I try to imply. If I want to say something on these boards, I will state it plainly, I don't play stupid little word games. If I meant to say that atheists live meaningless lives, I would have said that. But since that's not what I believe, I didn't say it. So please stop deciding what I meant, and please stop deciding what was implied, when there really is very little basis for you to make such an assumption. I would think that you've read enough of my posts to know that I don't skate around issues and phrases, I don't play with semantics, and I don't put in subtle jabs like "atheists can't lead good lives" There was no hidden meaning in what I wrote, the fact that you want so badly for there to have been, is unsettling.
"I don't know" is a more intellectually honest answer than what he did with that girl. He sought out to try to put the girl in her place for asking such a question. Funny you should say "I don't know is not an answer to anything" Because that's one of my major gripes with modern pseudo science...people are so afraid to just admit that they don't know something, so they postulate and guess, all it leads to is arrogance. Dawkins made no attempt to answer her question because he himself knows the consequence if he is wrong, and hates admitting it, so instead, he decided to get a rise out of the crowd with his little tangent. A tangent that I myself found a little bit offensive...to state that the girl was a Christian because she grew up in a Christian household is asenine. Does he not realize that a great deal of people come to their faith in spite of the household in which they grew up? Just look at Akiane, hell, just look at me. My parents certainly were not always the Jesus freaks that they are today. He acts as though people who are a part of a religion have no choice in the matter, quite conveniently I might add.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Of course I understand why he have gave the answer...what I find VERY amusing is that you simply assume that I have no idea why he gave the answer. In truth, there are many reasons why Dawkins gave the answer that he did. For you to sit there and give only one, completely misrepresents Dawkins as a person, and why he answered the way he did. If it was simply a matter of wanting people to think, he wouldn't make constant snarky remarks about religion.
I'm not going to get into whether or not atheism is foolish. If you want to start a thread about the senselessness of atheism, Christianity, or any other belief, go right ahead.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.