Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Failing to see how ridiculous religion is until you escape it

12467…20

Comments

  • #92
    cavedave
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭cavedave


    You're saying that we believe in concepts as ridiculous as god because we accept the value of money. You're conflating the subjective value of money with the objective existence of god
    Money is not as ridiculous as god. Your not around to be proved wrong about god (or so i believe). Many people have lived to use wheelbarrows of cash to buy bread to show they were wrong about money.

    I thought i was conflating it with peoples subjective faith in the existence and interest of god

    There is a great video here from the economist Tyler Cowen. He talks about some of the biases we fall into and how even being aware of these biases does not remove them

    From 15 minutes in
    "Its so easy to pick out a few areas to be agnostic in, 'Im agnostic about religion or politics' then its a portfolio move to be more dogmatic elsewhere"

    "Don't fall into the trap of thinking because your agnostic on some things that your being reasonable about your self deception and your stories and your open mindedness"

    wheelbarrow.jpg


  • #93
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    liamw wrote: »
    'I've joined the Chruch of Scientology'
    'haha have you booked a good seat on the spaceship? lol'
    'yep, first class, only €150 extra per month, have you been saying your prayers so you can go to heaven?'

    Did you ever think that you had hit a raw nerve, or depending on how much you know about your friend, that you were deeply insensitive to the reasons why he's religious? I'm guessing no on both counts. Some atheists, forever lacking in the human touch. :)


  • #94
    liamw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Did you ever think that you had hit a raw nerve, or depending on how much you know about your friend, that you were deeply insensitive to the reasons why he's religious? I'm guessing no on both counts. Some atheists, forever lacking in the human touch. :)

    The point isn't about how insensitive I was. The point is that the idea of heaven does not seem ridiculous to him, even though the spaceship does, and it's interesting to examine why that is the case.

    And as I mentioned, brainwashing or compartmentalization may be the answer.


  • #95
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    liamw: In reality most people who come to believe in God, don't do so out of "brainwashing" or "indoctrination". People have to decide, do I really want to understand how a person has experienced faith, or do I want to pretend to understand.


  • #96
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Jakkass wrote: »
    liamw: In reality most people who come to believe in God, don't do so out of "brainwashing" or "indoctrination". People have to decide, do I really want to understand how a person has experienced faith, or do I want to pretend to understand.

    I'm pretty sure we've had this conversation, about how asking a believer why they believe is not necessarily helpful because the reasons they give aren't necessarily going to be consistent or the actual reasons. Think of it in terms of asking a creationist why they reject evolution and you'll start to get the idea. They'll go on and on and on about proteins and probability and scientific data but the actual reason is because they think that they'll have to drop the bible and bring in social Darwinism if they accept it. If you ask them they'll tell you their reasons are rational but they're not, they're emotional.

    We know why believers say they believe but we have rejected those reasons as inconsistent and illogical and are looking to find the actual motivation behind, in this case, getting offended that someone laughed at the idea that the omnipotent creator of the universe can read your mind and will intervene in your life to help you while at the same time laughing at ideas that are no more ridiculous.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    We know why believers say they believe but we have rejected those reasons as inconsistent and illogical and are looking to find the actual motivation behind, in this case, getting offended that someone laughed at the idea that the omnipotent creator of the universe can read your mind and will intervene in your life to help you while at the same time laughing at ideas that are no more ridiculous.

    There is such a thing as gratuitous dismissal. Don't expect anyone who believes in God to take you seriously when you are going to discount religious experience or anything to do with life in faith when analysing the situation.

    That's called limiting your source material. It generally serves to limits ones results to what they want to hear rather than what is actually the case.

    By the by, I wouldn't expect a reasonable response from an atheist if I decided to ridicule them and what they stood for. Likewise, that is probably true in the case of liamw. I wouldn't see any productive purpose in speaking to someone with that tone about my faith. I can talk to numerous other people who are interested in finding out more.


  • #98
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    liamw wrote: »
    The point isn't about how insensitive I was. The point is that the idea of heaven does not seem ridiculous to him, even though the spaceship does, and it's interesting to examine why that is the case.

    And as I mentioned, brainwashing or compartmentalization may be the answer.

    Do you know this person well enough? If he has suffered from bereavement maybe the concept of heaven is one of great comfort. The spaceship on the other hand offers nothing to him. Quite simple really. :)


  • #99
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    irishconvert wrote: »

    I used to be a Catholic myself and found many of the practises you mention rediculous also. I stopped practising it totally. But then I found a different religion that made so much more sense to me.
    Yes, quite. I have often found myself pondering how ridiculous catholicism is only to be surprised at how much more sensible and believable islam is. Oh no wait, I am getting mixed up there. It is fcuking ridiculous as well, arguably even more so.

    MrP


  • #100
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Jakkass wrote: »
    There is such a thing as gratuitous dismissal. Don't expect anyone who believes in God to take you seriously when you are going to discount religious experience or anything to do with life in faith when analysing the situation.

    That's called limiting your source material. It generally serves to limits ones results to what they want to hear rather than what is actually the case
    Yes there is such a thing as gratuitous dismissal but I've heard christian reasons for believing far more times than I care to remember and it's always the same old logical fallacies. It's not that I've never listened to them, it's that I have listened to them over and over and they have never given me a good reason.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    By the by, I wouldn't expect a reasonable response from an atheist if I decided to ridicule them and what they stood for. Likewise, that is probably true in the case of liamw. I wouldn't see any productive purpose in speaking to someone with that tone about my faith. I can talk to numerous other people who are interested in finding out more.
    That you find it easier to talk about your faith with people who don't consider it to be ridiculous is not overly surprising to be honest. Some would say it's self-evident. Personally I don't mind if someone thinks an opinion of mine is ridiculous because not only am I able to defend them, I enjoy defending them. I will take great pleasure in showing that the opinion is not actually ridiculous. If I'm unable to do that and if I try to avoid having my positions questioned, preferring instead to talk to people who either agree with me or don't really have a strong opinion on it, I begin to question whether my opinion is actually valid.


  • #101
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Do you know this person well enough? If he has suffered from bereavement maybe the concept of heaven is one of great comfort. The spaceship on the other hand offers nothing to him. Quite simple really. :)

    Yeah we know why he got angry, he has an emotional connection to those beliefs and not to the ones of scientology. What's baffling is how the emotional connection to those beliefs can make him overlook the fact that they are equally ridiculous. If someone insults an opinion or belief of yours and instead of pointing out their error you get angry, you should ask yourself if you actually have any basis for your opinion or if you're just emotionally attached to it


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Sam: A lot of the agnostics I speak with do disagree with me rather strongly, they just seem to be more willing to engage with the topic in a calm manner. Occasionally you do get some atheists who would be of this mindset, but it is rare.


  • #103
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    Jakkass wrote: »
    liamw: In reality most people who come to believe in God, don't do so out of "brainwashing" or "indoctrination". People have to decide, do I really want to understand how a person has experienced faith, or do I want to pretend to understand.

    I can confidently say I've never herd such crap in my whole life!


  • #104
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Sam: A lot of the agnostics I speak with do disagree with me rather strongly, they just seem to be more willing to engage with the topic in a calm manner. Occasionally you do get some atheists who would be of this mindset, but it is rare.

    Will you stop calling people agnostic!?:mad:


  • #105
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Malty T: I know a lot of people who would refer to themselves as agnostic and disagree with the title of atheist, or even with those who are strong in opposing belief.

    It's entirely valid, and I'll be continuing to deal with agnostics and atheists in separate terms based on this.

    The title agnostic is used to refer to Greek philosophers such as Protagoras who said that he could not know whether or not god existed.


  • #106
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Yeah we know why he got angry, he has an emotional connection to those beliefs and not to the ones of scientology. What's baffling is how the emotional connection to those beliefs can make him overlook the fact that they are equally ridiculous. If someone insults an opinion or belief of yours and instead of pointing out their error you get angry, you should ask yourself if you actually have any basis for your opinion or if you're just emotionally attached to it

    Why would he do that? Why would he admit that the one thing that gives him emotional stability is ridiculous? Maybe they feel that they don't have to entertain any attack on something so fundamental in their life and will in turn simply "get angry". If someone calls my mother a derogatory term I'm not going to calmly explain why my mother is not, for argument's sake, a bitch. I'm going to get angry and tell him in no uncertain terms where to go.
    Malty_T wrote: »
    Will you stop calling people agnostic!?:mad:

    lol whut? I'm agnostic, and I took no offence. :)


  • #107
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Sam: A lot of the agnostics I speak with do disagree with me rather strongly, they just seem to be more willing to engage with the topic in a calm manner. Occasionally you do get some atheists who would be of this mindset, but it is rare.

    Jakkass, I engage with believers in a calm manner all the time. The phenomenon you are experiencing is not the closed mindedness of atheists angry at believers, it's the frustration people experience at your complete lack of ability to answer a straight question. My thinking would be that agnostics are more prepared to let you get away with it because they don't feel as strongly about it.

    Anyway, this is about the hundredth time you've said on this forum that you don't like talking to atheists. Firstly I find that quite ironic and secondly, we get it, you think atheists are closed minded and you don't like talking to them. You don't have to keep telling us, it adds nothing, especially because we think you're closed minded and we don't think the fact that you don't like talking to atheists reflects on us, we think it reflects on you, we think you just don't like the fact that we're not prepared to accept your incessant question evasion as a pretense of legitimate debate

    But that's just my opinion....


  • #108
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Agnosticism is not a religious position, it is a qualifier of certain claims being unknown.

    I regard myself as an agnostic atheist.
    You cannot be just an agnostic.


  • #109
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Agnosticism is not a religious position, it is a qualifier of certain claims being unknown.

    I regard myself as an agnostic atheist.
    You cannot be just an agnostic.

    Nobody said it was?

    One can be agnostic about a lot of things outside of religion. However, agnostic as a term for people who cannot know whether or not God exists is apt and valid.

    How about not getting bogged down in semantics?


  • #110
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Nobody said it was?

    One can be agnostic about a lot of things outside of religion. However, agnostic as a term for people who cannot know whether or not God exists is apt and valid.

    How about not getting bogged down in semantics?

    Because you're using both atheist and agnostic in the wrong sense.

    You're an agnostic unless you KNOW God exists.
    The majority of the world are agnostics they just believe never knowing only believing.

    Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a God.
    Theism is belief in a God.


  • #111
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Why would he do that? Why would he admit that the one thing that gives him emotional stability is ridiculous? Maybe they feel that they don't have to entertain any attack on something so fundamental in their life and will in turn simply "get angry". If someone calls my mother a derogatory term I'm not going to calmly explain why my mother is not, for argument's sake, a bitch. I'm going to get angry and tell him in no uncertain terms where to go.

    Bitch is a subjective term and not a great example here. Instead let's say your mother weighs 20 stone and someone says "your mother is fat". Now you have an emotional connection to your mother and you might consider what has just been said insulting or rude but that in no way changes the fact that your mother is fat, the person is simply stating fact.

    Now, lets say a very fat person had just fallen down in front of the two of you and you had just spent the last ten minutes laughing at it and then you pointed out that his mother is also fat. If he is prepared to laugh at other fat people but gets offended when it is pointed out that his mother is also fat, then he is a hypocrite. as is the person in this case who will laugh at beliefs of others for being ridiculous but is unwilling to look critically at his own and see that they are just as ridiculous. The phrase "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" springs to mind.

    There is one case in which someone should admit that the one thing that gives him emotional stability is ridiculous, and that is when it is in fact ridiculous or at least when he cannot provide any valid justification for why he believes which makes the fact that he believes ridiculous. You shouldn't get angry at someone who points out something that is true


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Malty T: The facts are both in literature, and in peoples speech the terms are often distinguished.

    People can choose to call themselves "agnostic atheists" if they like, but the term "agnostic" is acceptable and valid by dictionary and in general vocabulary for people who take a position of not knowing.

    I personally think atheists go further than most agnostics.

    Again, do we want to get into semantics, or do we want to discuss the real issues?


  • #113
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Bitch is a subjective term and not a great example here. Instead let's say your mother weighs 20 stone and someone says "your mother is fat". Now you have an emotional connection to your mother and you might consider what has just been said insulting or rude but that in no way changes the fact that your mother is fat, the person is simply stating fact.

    You're dealing in a fact there. His mother in fat, he cannot deny that. For the OP's friend however he feels what he believes in is a fact, so he can deny the OP's accusations.
    Now, lets say a very fat person had just fallen down in front of the two of you and you had just spent the last ten minutes laughing at it and then you pointed out that his mother is also fat. If he is prepared to laugh at other fat people but gets offended when it is pointed out that his mother is also fat, then he is a hypocrite. as is the person in this case who will laugh at beliefs of others for being ridiculous but is unwilling to look critically at his own and see that they are just as ridiculous. The phrase "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" springs to mind.

    You're working from a position that the OP's friend *knows* what he believes is ridiculous. Again, why would he acknowledge something is ridiculous when he feels it isn't? Personally as a non-believer I don't find his friend to be a hypocrite, scientology is right up there with the biggest scams in history. Say what you want about Christianity, but at least it's not a religion based on extorting thousands of dollars/pounds/euros/whatever out of their followers just so those followers can feel they are more valued within the religion.
    There is one case in which someone should admit that the one thing that gives him emotional stability is ridiculous, and that is when it is in fact ridiculous or at least when he cannot provide any valid justification for why he believes which makes the fact that he believes ridiculous. You shouldn't get angry at someone who points out something that is true

    He doesn't think your accusations are true though, he honestly believes that. Let's think about this for a second, if someone is religious admits that their stance is ridiculous, then surely they can no longer believe in it. Yo you are assuming that the OP's friend is living a lie, when in his own head he's not living a lie. It doesn't make one ounce of sense for him to admit what he believes is ridiculous. He's willfully pulling the rug out from underneath him, why would he do that?


  • #114
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    You're dealing in a fact there. His mother in fat, he cannot deny that. For the OP's friend however he feels what he believes in is a fact, so he can deny the OP's accusations.



    You're working from a position that the OP's friend *knows* what he believes is ridiculous. Again, why would he acknowledge something is ridiculous when he feels it isn't? Personally as a non-believer I don't find his friend to be a hypocrite, scientology is right up there with the biggest scams in history. Say what you want about Christianity, but at least it's not a religion based on extorting thousands of dollars/pounds/euros/whatever out of their followers just so those followers can feel they are more valued within the religion.



    He doesn't think your accusations are true though, he honestly believes that. Let's think about this for a second, if someone is religious admits that their stance is ridiculous, then surely they can no longer believe in it. Yo you are assuming that the OP's friend is living a lie, when in his own head he's not living a lie. It doesn't make one ounce of sense for him to admit what he believes is ridiculous. He's willfully pulling the rug out from underneath him, why would he do that?

    You're kind of missing my point here LZ5by5. Of course he doesn't think his own beliefs are ridiculous, if he did he wouldn't hold them. The point is that someone who thinks the creator of the universe impregnated a Jewish woman 2000 years ago so he could sacrifice himself to himself to save us from himself and that this guy walked on water and turned water into wine and raised from the dead etc etc etc shouldn't be laughing at someone who thinks that aliens might take us away on a spaceship. I actually find the latter slightly more plausible personally.

    I understand why people get angry when their unjustifiable opinions are challenged and they've got nothing to say. It's not even isolated to religious beliefs, people have irrational emotional connections to all kinds of things. The point is that them getting angry at people instead of looking critically at whether they're right to hold that opinion is not a problem with the person who pointed out the inconsistency in their position, it's a character flaw with the person who has an emotional connection to an idea but no rational basis for it.

    If you can't explain why you believe in something as extraordinary as christianity you should ask yourself why you believe it and you certainly shouldn't go out ridiculing other people's opinions that are no less extraordinary and which have no less supporting evidence


  • #115
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    You're kind of missing my point here LZ5by5. Of course he doesn't think his own beliefs are ridiculous, if he did he wouldn't hold them. The point is that someone who thinks the creator of the universe impregnated a Jewish woman 2000 years ago so he could sacrifice himself to himself to save us from himself and that this guy walked on water and turned water into wine and raised from the dead etc etc etc shouldn't be laughing at someone who thinks that aliens might take us away on a spaceship. I actually find the latter slightly more plausible personally.

    Maybe he doesn't believe those aspects, maybe he's a theologian when it comes to those aspects. But let me guess, he's not truly a christian if that is the case because Atheists like their religious to be all totally off the wall in regards to their beliefs.
    I understand why people get angry when their unjustifiable opinions are challenged and they've got nothing to say. It's not even isolated to religious beliefs, people have irrational emotional connections to all kinds of things. The point is that them getting angry at people instead of looking critically at whether they're right to hold that opinion is not a problem with the person who pointed out the inconsistency in their position, it's a character flaw with the person who has an emotional connection to an idea but no rational basis for it.

    I do understand you, from the outside for people like us, they are both incredibly outlandish sets of beliefs. However I really think it's a lot to ask for someone to critically assess their own beliefs and come to the conclusion that "I really don't have a foot to stand on so I can't be casting stones." Where does that leave that person on his stance in regards to religion? He'd be constantly on the backfoot, not being able to justify what he believes because he conceded already that what he believes is ridiculous. It's alot to ask the human brain to do that.


  • #116
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,599 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Jakkass wrote: »
    I personally think atheists go further than most agnostics.
    The only 'further' they go is to admit what they actually do believe or not believe in, rather then just what they "know". i.e. They answer the question rather than fobbing it off as is the tendency of 'agnostics but not atheists'.


  • #117
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    Maybe he doesn't believe those aspects, maybe he's a theologian when it comes to those aspects. But let me guess, he's not truly a christian if that is the case because Atheists like their religious to be all totally off the wall in regards to their beliefs.
    If he doesn't believe those things then he shouldn't get pissed off with someone saying they're ridiculous, he should agree

    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    I do understand you, from the outside for people like us, they are both incredibly outlandish sets of beliefs. However I really think it's a lot to ask for someone to critically assess their own beliefs and come to the conclusion that "I really don't have a foot to stand on so I can't be casting stones." Where does that leave that person on his stance in regards to religion? He'd be constantly on the backfoot, not being able to justify what he believes because he conceded already that what he believes is ridiculous. It's alot to ask the human brain to do that.

    He'd only be on the backfoot if he insisted on keeping the beliefs that he had no basis whatsoever for. He'd keep getting that uneasy feeling you get from cognitive dissonance. The way I look at it every idea should be subject to critical scrutiny no matter how emotionally attached someone might be to it. No ideas should be put on a pedestal away from criticism. It's the only way knowledge advances


  • #118
    liamw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    I do understand you, from the outside for people like us, they are both incredibly outlandish sets of beliefs. However I really think it's a lot to ask for someone to critically assess their own beliefs and come to the conclusion that "I really don't have a foot to stand on so I can't be casting stones." Where does that leave that person on his stance in regards to religion? He'd be constantly on the backfoot, not being able to justify what he believes because he conceded already that what he believes is ridiculous. It's alot to ask the human brain to do that.

    To be honest, I think it must be very frustrating for him. One side of his brain is telling him that I'm right and it's a load of nonsense, and another part is emotionally connected to this idea of heaven and that when people die he might get to meet them again.

    He doesn't want to lose that comfort, and in doing so has to try block out all logic when it comes thinking about concepts like heaven. So, he does'nt think about it. And he gets pissed off when I try to make him think about it. I'd call it a state of denial.


  • #119
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    cavedave wrote: »
    Religion gains tangible benefits and comforts. Religious people live longer for example.

    I don't suppose you have any proof for this do you??

    Also, if we are miserable sinners here on Earth, and heaven is so amazing and paradise-like etc etc why would religious people WANT to live longer?? Shouldn't they want to be with God all the quicker to escape this hellish, damned exsistence?


  • #120
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    TwoShedsJackson wrote: »
    Also, if we are miserable sinners here on Earth, and heaven is so amazing and paradise-like etc etc why would religious people WANT to live longer?? Shouldn't they want to be with God all the quicker to escape this hellish, damned exsistence?

    The thing is we aren't miserable. We've become more than conquerors through the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Romans 8:37-39). Our old selves have died, and we have new life. (Romans 6:3-4) Hence why Christians speak of being "born again" (John 3:5). Why would that make me depressed or sad? That's the best news the world has ever heard, that's the amazing grace that you hear sung about.

    We have hope. We have new life, and a new chance to speak and live for Jesus in what often can be perceived as being a hopeless world.

    Our role as Christians, is to be a light to the rest of humanity for God. Why would I want to die now when God can use me right here, and when God is right here with me in the process?

    This existence is not or home (2 Corinthians 5:6), but God still has a purpose for us in the here and now. Paul debates whether or not it is better for him to return to God, or to remain in this earth. He concludes that it is better for him to remain here:
    Philiippians 1:21-26 wrote:
    For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell. I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better. But to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your account. Convinced of this, I know that I will remain and continue with you all, for your progress and joy in the faith, so that in me you may have ample cause to glory in Christ Jesus, because of my coming to you again.

    I think most Christians would agree with Paul, we are Christ's body on this earth, it is our role and our purpose to be His hands and feet on this earth, to serve as witnesses for Him. Why on earth would it be preferable to die when we know that people need to hear His Gospel?

    Existence isn't hellish, or damned, it is what we make it.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I'm not quoting it as fact, rather I'm answering the question, why do believers hang on, what drives us. The answer is the hope that we have received through the Gospel, whether or not it is objectively true.

    I want to live a full life, because I believe that Jesus Christ has the power to transform lives.


Advertisement