Defense of Christianity Part 5a, Religious Epistemology part 1
Uploader Comments (migkillertwo)
All Comments (22)
-
Do you really think Pascal's wager is a good argument? It's a horrible, inconsistent, and rather absurd argument to me. I could illustrate why but I have trouble believing even you fall for it's naive premise.
-
uhm, i asked you to justify your claim that it is the most pragmatic of all possible position on the after-life. I could easily think of far better ones then that, and so i suspect what ever criteria you are using is purely self serving and self congratulating.
-
the problem with this "atheist_theist with agnostic in the middle" line of argument is that it conflates a belief with a knowledge claim and it INSISTS on reformulating a lack of belief into a positive statement such as "I don't believe in god = I believe god does not exist". the problem is that if that is a ligit move, the agnosticism is a self contradictions, as it would be "I don't believe either god or not god = I believe both god and not god are false" which would in turn to believe both.
-
ezekiel 18:30-32
30 "Therefore, O house of Israel, I will judge you, each one according to his ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. 31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!
It does seem that God doesnt want people to go to hell
-
and I could easily throw a bible chapter back. Ezekiel 18
-
"I will have compassion upon whom I have compassion. or how about verse 17? "It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy." "
yeah so? how do you derive from that that God doesnt want a saving relationship with everyone with whom he can have such a relationship?
and what is romans 9 actually about? What is paul talking about and to whom and for what reason?
I would say that romans 9 has nothing to do with personal salvation at all
oh and by the way, shove your "my world views has the most utility" straight up your ass, or at least justify your statement.
tooltime9901 2 years ago
"straight up your ass, or at least justify your statement."
well christianity DOES say that some will suffer in teh afterlife, and some will enjoy eternal bliss, and that this IS contingent upon your adherence to the worldview so....
migkillertwo 2 years ago
regarding God not wanting to have a saving relationship with everyone.
Could you give any possible reason as to why God wouldnt want a saving relationship to every of his specially created souls outside of some vague bible referance.
and romans 9? gimme a break, you cannot even get that from romans 9. I defy you to back that up
If God doesnt want a saving relationship with someone that that person is unavoidably damned. So in your opinion has God pleasure in the deaths of the wicked?
Knowntje 2 years ago
"and romans 9? gimme a break, you cannot even get that from romans 9. I defy you to back that up"
Yup, the core of Christian theology (the Book of Romans) is "a vague reference" HAHAHA!
I will have compassion upon whom I have compassion. or how about verse 17? "It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy."
migkillertwo 2 years ago
wait, how is belief in God pragmatic again? Just because it can't be proved that it doesn't exist?
Sounds like reaching..
TheObnubilators 2 years ago
"wait, how is belief in God pragmatic again?"
Pascal's wager
migkillertwo 2 years ago