Quote Originally Posted by darth stoner
Could you point out the hypocrisy ?

I'd be happy too, although I do have to admit... :beatdeadhorse:

I've pointed out to you one example of how believing something because you were told to would have ended up negatively affecting you. I can do it with pretty much any other situation (getting in the middle of the road, jumping out of the window head first, get in the bear cage @ the local zoo, let yourself burn, you pick).

If I (or any1 else, even a "divine" voice in your head when you're high) asked you to do any of the above, do you think you're better off with faith or with rational thought ?

If you answered faith, then we have nothing else to discuss.

Glad to hear your openminded towards discussion. Let me provide you with a counter-example, when I was young my parents warned me not to touch the stove, they said it would burn, and even though I'd never seen the stove burn anything, I took their word for it. At 4 years old (younger?) I didn't have much in the way of critical reasoning skills, but I had some faith in my parents. So I guess you could say I took their word on faith, and remained unburned by stove.


But hey, if you need a bigger example, just ask yourself if the 9/11 hijackers would have had the balls to kill themselves if they seriously did not believe there was an eternal life of joy with i-dunno-how-many virgins waiting for them in heaven. Now you tell me that is not bad and is a fucking hypocrisy

Actually, I think this is a horrible example. You presume that any suicide attack or total commitment is impossible without belief of immortality. And that's clearly false. I don't think there are any virgins waiting for me, but that doesn't mean I can't think of some things that I think are worth dying for. Can't you?
All bold my own.

And in addition, I guess I have to explain... It's hypocritical to assert that people need evidence to believe things, but then provide none. We're all just supposed to take your word on the matter I suppose, but honestly you're not that convincing.

I suspect your definition of religion if very different from that of most religious people. And that's sad, because you think you're proving something, but actually you're completely missing the point...