Could you be wrong?

[JJ50]

I am of the opinion that no god or afterlife exists, and that much of what is attributed to Jesus is exaggerated or untrue. However, I could be wrong in which case, I must ensure I take my suitcase of asbestos clothing with me to hell.

Are others, whether believers or unbelievers, ready to admit that it is possible their stance on matters of faith could be wrong?

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to post 1 by JJ50]

Please...

Start with using OR gate testing first. Which one is (likely) winner. The Question of Truth procedure.

Next: Have you gotten all the information in order to make a decision? In my case, all religion can now be decided scientifically. By OBEs, people have a chance to travel to Heaven and tell about it truthfully (5 lie detectors++) and have it fMRI confirmed too.

Change of heart?

[Bust Nak]

I am of the opinion that no god or afterlife exists, and that much of what is attributed to Jesus is exaggerated or untrue. However, I could be wrong in which case, I must ensure I take my suitcase of asbestos clothing with me to hell.

Are others, whether believers or unbelievers, ready to admit that it is possible their stance on matters of faith could be wrong?

Wrong on which part? Some god concepts can be ruled out as logical contradictions, I cannot be wrong about those. Everything else I can be wrong about.

[JJ50]

[Replying to post 2 by Aetixintro]

Ehhhhhhhh, I have no idea what you are talking about?

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to post 4 by JJ50]

Too bad! Because, ehhhhhhhh, I have no idea why you don't have any idea of what I am talking about?

[Jagella]

Are others, whether believers or unbelievers, ready to admit that it is possible their stance on matters of faith could be wrong?

Yes, of course I could be wrong. I'm a fallible human being who makes mistakes, and there's no guarantee that what I think is right or true must be right or true. Like anybody else, I'm biased looking for reasons to believe what I want to believe while being slow to accept anything that might argue against what I want to believe.

By contrast, many people are loathe to admit that they are fallible and make mistakes. For them their beliefs are certainly true. They seem oblivious to their bias but are quick to see bias in others.

And I see this mindset in many Christians.

[FWI]

[Replying to post 1 by JJ50]

The most important part of your comments is the admitting that they are only opinions, thus they have no factual basis to them. The reality is that un-believers cannot prove that God doesn't exist, nor that there is no afterlife. They also cannot support the accusations, which are claimed about the Christ. Yet, you seem to believe that if you are wrong, you'll be going to a hell…However, anyone who has thoroughly researched the heaven or hell doctrine would have found that there is no such concept in the bible.

Therefore, my life experiences, before the calling and those after, makes it clear that I am correct in my beliefs and have no doubts or thoughts that I could be wrong…This, for me, is truly an unexplained blessing.

[Elijah John]

I am of the opinion that no god or afterlife exists, and that much of what is attributed to Jesus is exaggerated or untrue. However, I could be wrong in which case, I must ensure I take my suitcase of asbestos clothing with me to hell.

Are others, whether believers or unbelievers, ready to admit that it is possible their stance on matters of faith could be wrong?

Evangelical Christians sometimes cite Pascal's wager on questions like this. The Christian, they say, has nothing to lose by believing in Christ. The atheist, by contrast, goes to hell if they are wrong.

But this overlooks an important possibility, if not probability. If God exists, and Jesus is NOT God, then people who worship him as such are violating the first commandment, the prohibition against idolatry. What is the penalty for this kind of idolatry? God only knows. But it seems risky to me to worship Jesus of Nazareth as "God", instead of Father YHVH alone.

I could be wrong, but so could they be. Evangelicals may indeed be very surprised to find Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and even atheists in Heaven, and learn that God's love mercy and compassion is far greater than their rigid theology allows.

[Bust Nak]

The reality is that un-believers cannot prove that God doesn't exist...

Which God? Insert the problem of evil here for those omnipotent and good kinds of deities.

However, anyone who has thoroughly researched the heaven or hell doctrine would have found that there is no such concept in the bible.

Maybe not a literal lake of fire hell, but no hell even as a concept? Does the everlasting second death not count?

[Zzyzx]

.

The reality is that un-believers cannot prove that God doesn't exist, nor that there is no afterlife.

In reasoned discourse or debate those who do not accept a proposition ('believe') have NO obligation to prove non-existence.

Expecting proof of non-existence is a fool's errand. No one can prove that invisible, undetectable unicorns, fairies, leprechauns do not exist.

Thus, no one can rationally ask for proof of non-existence of invisible, undetectable 'gods'.

This is a classic example of argument from ignorance (Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), or appeal to ignorance ('ignorance' stands for "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It says something is true because it has not yet been proved false. Or, that something is false if it has not yet been proved true.