Originally posted by RogerB
Spare us your personal problems.
But you claim to be able to provide answers to personal problems! Then when I offer to list my objections to your claims you degenerate to ad hominem insults.
Not very effective evangelism there, Roger.
Or perhaps you're only posting here to "bait the atheist" instead of trying to convert them. I wonder what your deity would have to say about that?
Key word there is "Your" (as in MINE, not yours). God gave you the free will to accept or reject Him. So you think that when you die, it's just GAME OVER? Let's say you give us Christians a .01% chance of being right....what do you think about spending eternity in hell (besides the fact that you'll be in good company)?
That's merely another tired retread of Pascal's Wager, Roger. Let's put a different spin on your question...
- "Let's say you give us Hindus a .01% chance of being right....what do you think about spending eternity in hell..."
"Let's say you give us Muslims a .01% chance of being right....what do you think about spending eternity in hell..."
"Let's say you give us Buddhists a .01% chance of being right....what do you think about spending eternity never reaching Nirvana..."
"Let's say you give us Shintos a .01% chance of being right....what do you think about spending eternity in hell "
"Let's say you give us Animists a .01% chance of being right....what do you think about spending eternity in hell "
"Let's say you give us Mithrans a .01% chance of being right....what do you think about spending eternity in hell "
I've belabored a point to illustrate the flaw in Pascal's Wager - it presents a false dichotomy. It incorrectly reduces the choices to two - the speaker's religion and anything else. This is a logical flaw because it assumes that the speaker has proven his religion to be the only one worth considering. Something which you have not yet done...
So you admit that you just make these things up?
Not usually, after almost three years posting here I find few original points presented by the religionists, so I mostly recast arguments I've used before.