原帖由 weakest 於 2008-2-16 00:00 發表 
"沒錯呀~ 反之亦然. 基督徒作壞見證, 就未必是因為信仰的問題. 我也同意很多非基督徒也能無私奉獻的. "
1. Yes. The argument would be ok as long as sufficient cases are considered.
"只是就個人經歷, 及認識的 ...
"只是就個人經歷, 及認識的基督徒親身經歷, 信仰確能使人有勇氣及力量去改變, 去面對困難."
2. Maybe. But many terrorists are also brave in their attack, because of their religious belief,
bravo !!
"曾經聽過, 個人也覺得說得不錯的一個譬喻: 信仰其實是一個賭博. (大前題是: 我們"證明"不了神的存在, 也"證明"不了神的不存在). 付出了一生去信, 就算輸了, 最多損失了幾十年時間, 可能也有一些感情(但如沒有神, 這些時間感情原也浪費掉居多). 但如果真是有神, 但又沒有去信. 這個損失可大了.
(註: 我並非希望有人因這功利說法而去信. 這不是全部.)"
5. This gambling argument, for me, suggests that believing in Christianity is a silly choice. For two reasons:
a.
If we are to gamble, why don't choose those Gods in religions that allows many other Gods to be worshipped? It is silly for us to choose those religions that holds 一神論. If we are to gamble, the probability of winning is surely higher if we bet on more choices. Think of a game of throwing a fair die. If I bet on "1", "2", and "3"; and you bet on "4" only. Who are more likely to win? In here, I am basically assuming that all religions are equally likely to be true. Of course, a good choice would depend also on other evidences.
b.
It is logically impossible for a 全能God to exist. Therefore, it is not possible for the Christian God to exist (for Christian, God is 全能). As such, it is silly to bet on the "God" that won't exist. If you know that a die is not fair, and the die will never get "4", will you still bet on "4"?
how could ye bring up 'the pinpointing dice theory ??!!
2 the contrary , i could not
even i could ,
but ,
i could not do it so 深入浅出 as u
ThANKs 4 outspeaking 'the ideas which i could bring forth as well as those which i couldnt
 marvel
[ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-2-16 06:21 編輯 ] |