bimmylee said:
Wow, I had no idea you grew up around such influences. For the record, the belief that any one specific action/sin can automatically send you to hell is not biblical at all. I don't know where those people were getting their information about hell, but it certainly wasn't the Bible. Sorry you had to hear such things. They're certainly not true. God doesn't force Himself upon people. If a person dies and ends up in hell, it is not because he was "sent" there by God. You have every right to feel exasperated. Nobody should be preached to about going to hell; that doesn't accomplish anything for anybody, and it angers me that there are people out there who quickly turn others off to Christianity because of this kind of self-righteous talk. As for this forum, I'd say that anything a person posts has the potential to influence the thoughts of someone else, just like reading an editorial in a newspaper has the potential to influence the reader. But if we're belittling each other all day, the chance for intelligent debate dies rather quickly. (Believe it or not, you are quickly becoming one of my favorite people on this site to debate things with.) I would simply suggest to not outright call a person or a group of people "stupid" (even if you truly believe they actually are)... but that's up to you. |
In the way that a counterexample nullifies an argument your reply stands in such stark contrast to the view of religion and religious people advanced by Manus that it is a persuasive refutation of that view. To be sure there are clearly people of extreme view in any group of people, religious or otherwise, and forced to conclude based on an interaction with those individuals alone the conclusion would almost certainly look like what he puts forward.
However, considering that his story is in essence one of transition from ignorance to enlightenment it initially seems odd that he did not encounter any non-extremist religious persons during that transition to enlightenment. At first this occurs to me as improbable, but considering further is probably best explained by a strongly held view not easily swayed. And as you point out it would certainly be a warranted bias in this scenario.
Having pointed that out, I now arrive at the thought that compelled me to reply. That the ignorance of such an upbringing would not be exclusive to the view of the outside world but would also pervade the view of religion as a whole. As a person leaves such an environment, and with only that experience to base off of, their view of religion would naturally lack true and full perspective representative of religion as a whole. It seems to me, that in a very real sense they would have one last remnant of ignorance to escape from.
Granted, we certainly all have our flaws, biases, and faults (and I probably have more than my fair share), but after reading his post in contrast with yours the impression of this remnant was quite strong for me.
@topic,
I believe evolution is the best theory we currently have, and that it is a well formed and well supported theory.
I don't know that I would use the word "accept" to describe my opinions on evolution, but in the casual sense of the word it is close enough.