How would a christian convert a muslim? Or to put it in more chrisitan terms, how would you go about saving the soul of a muslim? Say you discovered the man/woman you loved, or, god forbid, you’re your own child, had joined islam, how would you save them from eternal torment? How would you go about proving that jesus was god and mohammed was a false prophet, or that the bible is the word of god and the qur’an is merely a mythology book like the odyssey, ramayana, or book of mormon. It is your duty as a christian to attempt to save the souls of your loved ones, so how would you approach the problem? If the situation was flipped, and someone was trying to save your soul through a conversion to islam, how would you respond? Keep in mind that at least one religion has to be false. They both make mutually exclusive claims on divine truth, so if one is right than either you or your hypothetical loved one will undoubtedly be cast forever into the depths of hell.
Not sure if any of you have seen his video on consciousness and free will ( http://bigthink.com/ideas/daniel-dennett-explains-consciousness-and-free-will ), but Dennett says he believes humans possess free will. Though I share his belief, his reasoning seems circumspect. What do you think about it? Has he found a loophole in the laws of physics, or is it merely another misguided attempt to allay the fears he mentions.
I was so fed up with not being able to view my idea that i decided to post it again. I saw the first two comments, and was about to post a response to them when the idea went down. I didn't see the last two (sorry)but please repost them.
Well we all know that it is impossible to prove a negative, but at what point can one argue that so many of the core attributes of an individual are inaccurate or impossible that the traditional understanding of that individual is no longer valid. If we were to learn that Christopher Marlowe was the true author of works like "Romeo and Juliet," "Macbeth," and "Hamlet" than our previous understanding of "Shakespeare" would be completely wrong. Though a person named Shakespeare would still have lived, he would not have been the person we thought he was, and one might not be wrong to say that the Shakespeare who was arguably the greatest writer in the English language, the Shakespeare as we now know him, never really existed (or in the least that the genius playwright identity previously understood as "Shakespeare" should now be known as "Marlowe"). Can the same be true of Jesus? We can never prove that a Jesus didn’t exist, but if we can, through logic and reason, strip Jesus of his major attributes (god, son of god, performer of miracles, resurrection, ect), or show him to be more myth than man, than wouldn’t the traditional understanding of "Jesus" become so distorted as to be no longer recognizable? Most of Jesus’ more amazing attributes can be found in mythologies that predate his birth. Tales of a "son of god" were common and the theme of a "god" dying and then rising into heaven had also already been written (Krishna, Buddha). In fact almost every one of those acts that people associate with Jesus can be shown to have existed in a pervious mythological character. This, to me, makes Jesus less unique, and severely undermines the credibility of claims that he actually did what others had previously only done in myths. Such miraculous acts can also be attacked from a physics standpoint, since many are impossible according to the laws of physics (everything from a virgin birth to water into wine and the multiplication of loaves and fishes). If one were to see Jesus attacked in such a way is there really any solace in saying that it is impossible to prove he never existed, since the Jesus that probably did exist possessed none of the traits we currently identify as his? Corroborating evidence outside of the bible that points to Jesus’ existence is also incredible (not "amazing", but "not credible"). Writings like Josephus’ "Antiquities of the Jews" that mention Jesus were copied exclusively by Christian scribes. Most scholars now agree that the major portion of this text that discusses Jesus was falsified by scribes who were probably surprised by the suspiciously few mentions of their savior in such histories, and attempted to correct the obvious oversight. There are no credible sources that can be used to show that the Jesus of the bible ever existed, that the identity given him is not completely contrived. I believe that his identity as most understand it is complete myth. While a man named Jesus may have existed from roughly 1 BCE till 33 CE, his birth was not announced by a new star, he did not perform miracles, and he was not god or god’s son; and therefore he was not really "Jesus." I believe that "Jesus" never existed. Thoughts?
I saw Bill Maher's documentary Religulous on Friday and I loved it. The girl who was sitting next to me, a Catholic, was very offended and became teary eyed afterwards when talking about it. I was wondering what anyone else thought about the movie. I agree almost completely with Maher, an anti-theist, and strongly recomend the movie to anyone interested in religion, particularly other "new atheists."