Originally posted by whodeyReiterating the fact that there are differences between the two religions does not actually tackle the idea in the post you were replying to and is just a bit of preaching-to-the-choir, instead.
According to Christ his kingdom is not of this world.
According to Mo it is.
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyEr, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, they are not games in town also? Last I heard they counted for more than a billion followers.
Why do you suppose that these Abrahamic religions are about the only game in town?
What is their appeal do you reckon?
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0904108.html
The top ten in terms of followers.
Originally posted by FMFUpon what is your confidence based? If for example other people find something convincing and you don't, upon what is your confidence based that your beliefs are true and there's are false? Is it solely based upon the fact that you happen not to find something convincing that other people do? Or is there more to it?
But I am confident that my beliefs are true. If you mean to say that you are confident that your beliefs are "true" and mine are not, I am fine with that, As I have said umpteen times before, your confidence, sincerity, certainty [and repetitiveness] have no bearing on what I find credible and what I find not credible.
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFMy only point here is, when man assumes the role of God, as a king, then heads role and evil is rampant.
Reiterating the fact that there are differences between the two religions does not actually tackle the idea in the post you were replying to and is just a bit of preaching-to-the-choir, instead.
Any religion not able to grasp that fails.
Originally posted by sonhouseAre the far eastern religions really that diverse world wide?
Er, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, they are not games in town also? Last I heard they counted for more than a billion followers.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0904108.html
The top ten in terms of followers.
I don't think so.
People in this forum generally live in the West which has been greatly influenced by Christianity. We in the West have also had dealing with Islam, mostly being attacked and having countries and parts of countries taken by force.
Judaism we have in the West do to the connection of Christianity and the fact that Jews were driven from their homeland and resettled in the West. The far East have had little impact on the West in war or culture through the centuries.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkMy confidence in what I believe is based on the degree of credibility of those things, and the lack of credibility of alternatives. For example if you find what you believe to be very convincing and what I believe to be unconvincing, you'd likely feel confident that you were right and I was wrong.
Upon what is your confidence based? If for example other people find something convincing and you don't, upon what is your confidence based that your beliefs are true and there's are false? Is it solely based upon the fact that you happen not to find something convincing that other people do? Or is there more to it?
Originally posted by whodeyReiterating your preference for the notions you happen to have a preference for my well be your "only point here", but it doesn't still address the idea put to you in the post of mine that started this exchange. Whether you personally think a religion 'succeeds' or 'fails' is neither here nor there, except in so far as it indicates which religion you like and which religion you don't like.
My only point here is, when man assumes the role of God, as a king, then heads role and evil is rampant.
Any religion not able to grasp that fails.
Originally posted by FMFIs your confidence based on evidence or a lack of evidence?
But I am confident that my beliefs are true. If you mean to say that you are confident that your beliefs are "true" and mine are not, I am fine with that, As I have said umpteen times before, your confidence, sincerity, certainty [and repetitiveness] have no bearing on what I find credible and what I find not credible.