Moderate Muslims and Catholics-Nice But Dumb? - Page 8

paddymcg21 · #71 02-22-2007, 02:39 PM

I think there's some confusion with definitions here. An atheist is not someone who "knows" there is no higher being or deity, but simply someone who doesnt believe. It is impossible to know wether or not a higher being such as God "yaweh" whom the catholics worship, exists. For centuries there have been unsolved debates as to God's existence from noted philosophers and theologians e.g. Anselm, Aquinas, Kant etc. . . why would there be such a debate if there was a clear cut answer? As a catholic I do believe in a higher being but try to look at it objectively. I can totally understand how many many people are atheists. If I wrote a big long book about an elephant who lives in a galaxy far far away who has wings and can turn invisible, how does that mean it exists??! You cannot simply define something into existence. Using basic philosophy it's more a case of proving something does exist as opposed to proving it doesn't. I would'nt ask someone to prove the elephant doesn't exist and when they fail, proclaim that it does, and this is similar to arguments for the existence of God. No one can know for sure that God exists but also it is not 100% that he doesn't. It all comes down to belief. The problem is the only "evidence" (quotation marks hinting at sarcasm) we have is extremely subjective. Near death experiences, numinous experiences etc etc. . . They hold little water in my book as they cannot be validated. Im losing the point here and I apologise. Btw an agnostic is someone who either doesn't even have the notion of a deity, doesnt know if there is a deity, hasnt made their mind up wether or not there is a deity or just plain doesnt care.

paddymcg21 · #72 02-22-2007, 02:43 PM

P.s the comments about inconsistencies in the bible are true but with good reason. All the books from the bible were written at totally different points in time. Narrative strategies change over time as do scientific breakthroughs. So one book may be a symbolic story (come on do you really think God created the world in 7 days given that he exists outside space and time or so we are to believe!)and some are meant almost entirely literally.

GoRedBirds · #73 02-22-2007, 05:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Btw an agnostic is someone who believes that humanity is incapable of knowing if God exists.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

paddymcg21 · #74 02-22-2007, 05:31 PM

therefore may not have the notion, may not know, and may not give a shiite. I wrote my posts from my knowledge, i didnt look it up especially. If thats the set in stone definition then touche, but even though I didn't type it so eloquently does that mean i'm wrong?? p.s by that definition I'd say around 98% of the world's population are agnostics. Anyone who thinks we can "KNOW" that God does or does not exists is deluded quite clearly. If we knew then how could there ever be any argument?? Anyone with half a braincell, even deeply religious people know that it is impossible to know. That's why it's called faith?? any thoughts goredbirds??

paddymcg21 · #75 02-22-2007, 05:33 PM

Personally in Lehman's terms I would define an agnostic person using 1 word: Neutral.

paddymcg21 · #76 02-25-2007, 06:11 PM

Sorry did my comments kill the debate?? lol

Richas · #77 03-01-2007, 06:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You are right I should have said that Atheism is illogical and irrational. At the very least it is a very risky position to take. Similar to playing 72 offsuit. The reason it leaves no chance to be wrong. If you believe in nothing you either get nothing or hell if you are wrong. If I believe in ANY religion that advocates eternal life I have a better chance mathmatically of living forever in "heaven" than someone who doesn't believe in anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if you assume that the non existent deity must be a vengeful git. If you are mistaken in your atheism but live by your personal morality and use your intelligence surely these are God given? What sort of God would condemn you to hell for living by them?

I'm pretty sure that there is no god but if he does exist and condemns fundamentally good people for not bending the knee stuff him. You never know maybe that's the only lot he'll let in :-) - makes more sense than established churches and their track record.

Richas · #78 03-01-2007, 06:56 PM

Surely David you have written enough books to know that avoiding contradicting yourself is pretty difficult. Your approach may be 100% rigorous and consistent but errors creep into the text and extracts are taken out of context. Imagine how much harder it would be if the book were written by a committee over several hundred years and claimed to cover everything not just poker with it's endless depends if.....

The other day I found myself halfway through an 18 player SNG, nice big chip lead and the SB short. All folded to the blinds and he pushed. I put him on either any two or very loose, looked at Q9s and called. He had A4o and I lost. Ho hum another day at the office except that I got slagged - it was a game with decent players I know so doubted myself a bit. Bothered me for the next hour as I played but I consoled my self later that the call was righteous as the text according to Sklansky and Miller - Theory and Practice has a handy tablet of stone on page 209 that proves it was fine. Even the heretic Harrington supported the call with his 10-1 commandment. That idolic symbol PokerStove (burn it heathens) even backed it despite being the workings of the devil.......

I bring this up only to show that once you write something down some people take it too seriously even after a few hundred years of printing and mass literacy never mind 2000 years ago when only a few could read and books were written by hand.

itiswell · #79 03-01-2007, 08:07 PM

Most Catholics believe in "Good Works" and think that the better they behave the greater chance you have to go to heaven. As a Christian salvation isn't a grey issue. You either believe in the "Finished works of Christ" or you don't. To say that someone who grew up in a church and lived a "normal life" committing no major felonies but never actually accept Jesus in their heart has a better chance to go to heaven than a rapist who repented and found Jesus is incorrect. You don't compare one man's action to anothers. You compare their actions to God's and every one comes up short. You can say its unfair for a non-believer to live a good life and go to hell. I say its unfair for anyone of us to go to heaven.

drunkencowboy · #80 03-02-2007, 02:35 PM

I have a question that I would really like people to take a stab at.. Hell, if you like the question, DS, you might want to make another thread...

Lets say you have a person who is raised in a Christian household and at the age of 13 decides that he(she) wants to be baptized and "accept Jesus as his lord and savior". As his teenage years progress - debates in school and church and other places lead him to no longer believe the Bible is true. When he becomes an adult, these ideas grow stronger and he begins to speak publicly against the religion. Through his own preaching he builds a small empire of followers who feel as strongly as he does. So the question:

Does this man/woman go to heaven?