Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Terrorism is all about instilling fear in people in order to further your own agenda. For example, you threaten to bomb their cities unless they leave your country. That fear, if strong enough, motivates them do as you ask. So if someone is told "you must believe in God or else you'll burn in hell", isn't that also instilling fear in them? And if so, doesn't that essentially make you a terrorist?
I wouldn't quite equate it with terrorism, since the proselytizers are not the ones doing the supposed "burning" (in most cases). But the concept of terrorism and religion are one and the same: Use fear to motivate behavior.
“If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it must be a duck”
If you don't believe in God why should you be bothered by someone saying you'll burn in hell. Not believing in God presupposes that God doesn't exist, and if God doesn't exist how could he cause you to burn in hell? Only when you believe God exists would you be worried by someone threatening you with hell fire. But as you argue, if you believe in God you'll not burn in hell. So you see the argument is counterintuitive. Truth of the matter is God forces nobody to believe in him, because he knows forced love cannot endure.
The belief that nonbelievers automatically go to hell is potentially damaging. It is fine if someone believes nonbelievers automatically go to hell, but the more someone lets this belief interfere with the real world, the more damaging the belief becomes.
If you don't believe in God why should you be bothered by someone saying you'll burn in hell. Not believing in God presupposes that God doesn't exist, and if God doesn't exist how could he cause you to burn in hell? Only when you believe God exists would you be worried by someone threatening you with hell fire. But as you argue, if you believe in God you'll not burn in hell. So you see the argument is counterintuitive. Truth of the matter is God forces nobody to believe in him, because he knows forced love cannot endure.
Everything you stated above begs the question of "which God?"
In most "hell mythology" based religions, merely believing in their god won't save your from hell. There usually involves some additional ritualistic ass-kissing, and/or acceptance of his terms of surrender.
In contrast, more reasonable and rational Gods (such as the Deist God) don't give a rat's a$$ if you believe in him/her/it or not. He has better things to worry about, as you'd expect from a non-mythological, non manmade super-intelligent creator of universes.
Notice how atheists and other anti-religionists consider the constant perpetuation of the old fire-and-brimstone idea useful to their anti-religion cause! These people know that isn't the official doctrine of the Catholic Church and of most mainline Protestant churches any longer but make like they don't know in order malign. Nothing strange since misrepresentation in the name of anti-religion is an acceptable tactic for them. That's why you see all these outlandish ideas and ridiculous questions cropping up.
It is truly a pity since a discussion with such individuals doesn't get anywhere because any evidence is either ignored or maligned and if they feel cornered there is always ridicule to fall back on.
Notice how atheists and other anti-religionists consider the constant perpetuation of the old fire-and-brimstone idea useful to their anti-religion cause! These people know that isn't the official doctrine of the Catholic Church and of most mainline Protestant churches any longer but make like they don't know in order malign. Nothing strange since misrepresentation in the name of anti-religion is an acceptable tactic for them. That's why you see all these outlandish ideas and ridiculous questions cropping up.
It is truly a pity since a discussion with such individuals doesn't get anywhere because any evidence is either ignored or maligned and if they feel cornered there is always ridicule to fall back on.
I find nothing wrong whatsoever with religion. I just think the belief that non-believers go to hell is potentially damaging. Because the perpetuation of the old fire-and-brimstone idea is largely gone now, the idea that nonbelievers go to hell is far less damaging. People have become smarter, and more morally rightious, and I respect them for it.
Furthermore, religion creates diversity. Diversity creates peace. Anything is better than having one majority group with a superiority complex. Any group which gains a majority will develop a superiority complex. I think a lack of belief in an afterlife, which many atheists share, makes more sense than any other belief system right now, as far as likelyhood of being true is concerned. As time goes by, more people will realize this. We need groups with differing perspectives from atheists to keep diversity and keep everyone relatively happy. My hat is off to all open-minded religious persons.
On the other hand, I have known atheists who think religion is terrible thing, so you may be correct about an anti-religion cause.
Notice how atheists and other anti-religionists consider the constant perpetuation of the old fire-and-brimstone idea useful to their anti-religion cause! These people know that isn't the official doctrine of the Catholic Church and of most mainline Protestant churches any longer but make like they don't know in order malign. Nothing strange since misrepresentation in the name of anti-religion is an acceptable tactic for them. That's why you see all these outlandish ideas and ridiculous questions cropping up.
It is truly a pity since a discussion with such individuals doesn't get anywhere because any evidence is either ignored or maligned and if they feel cornered there is always ridicule to fall back on.
Notice how atheists and other anti-religionists consider the constant perpetuation of the old fire-and-brimstone idea useful to their anti-religion cause! These people know that isn't the official doctrine of the Catholic Church and of most mainline Protestant churches any longer but make like they don't know in order malign. Nothing strange since misrepresentation in the name of anti-religion is an acceptable tactic for them. That's why you see all these outlandish ideas and ridiculous questions cropping up.
It is truly a pity since a discussion with such individuals doesn't get anywhere because any evidence is either ignored or maligned and if they feel cornered there is always ridicule to fall back on.
I must've misinterpreted the part of the Bible that allows your priests to be sick pedophiles.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.