Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen
If you don't care what I believe then why even reply to my post to begin with? If you don't care about me going to hell for eternity then that is
your choice not mine.
I replied because you asked a question
Doesn't the bible teach us to care for one another and each others well being? If you don't care that I'm going to hell then you don't care
about my well being and that means you don't practice what you preach.
Have a little compassion why don't you? I have compassion for everyone including you, I wouldn't say I like you very much because you are very
condescending, but I still have compassion for you and that is why I try to spread what I believe to be the truth.
Hmmm... first you complain about people preaching at you, and now you're indignant because I won't?
I never said that I don't care about you as a human being, I said that I don't care what you believe. And let me put it another way, to clarify it.
I respect your beliefs, and I don't see any reason for me to try and change them. As an example, I think that atheism is a perfectly rational
viewpoint, so apart from some basic "here's why I think that's wrong" arguments, I don't have a whole lot to say to atheists who aren't
Most people who post threads on ATS, including you and I, are fairly well set in their ways. Uncommon is the time that someone will post something,
have it refuted, and later say "oh, you're right, I was wrong, thanks." I see it in some of the non-religious threads that I participate in, but
it's almost unthinkable in a religious thread.
So, if I don't care what you believe, and I recognize that you're set in your ways and my refutation is going to fall on mostly deaf ears (and
that's not intended as an insult, like I said, I'm the same way,) why do I bother to post at all? Because I'm not writing for your benefit,
but, rather, for the benefit of future readers.
Let's use Autowrench and his "Roman Piso" theory as an example. If you search the web for information about it, you'll find a ton of websites
promoting it, and very few refuting it. The reason, of course, is that there is a core of believers who put together multiple websites, "books"
that just regurgitate what other "books" claim, and do other things that make it appear that there is a large undercurrent of people who are in on
the secret, while skeptics look at the notion, quickly realize that it is not merely incorrect, but so massively so that no one in their right mind
would believe it, and let it go at that.
That's because skeptics and scholars are critical thinkers -- they can look at something like that, see that there is no historical basis for it, and
just laugh at the foolishness. They, tragically, don't see the need to refute something as that is so crazy, because they don't recognize that not
all people are critical thinkers.
So a non-critical thinker comes across it, and what do THEY see? A whole lot of people, seemingly, supporting this notion, and almost no one saying
that it's wrong. To some people, that's all it takes to make them think that the theory is, in fact correct, because they are ignorant of history,
the concepts of historical research, or something else.
And that is why I do what I do -- when someone posts something that I know to be incorrect, I generally respond, because otherwise, there is the
chance that, in the future, someone will read the post, see nothing that counters it, and come to the incorrect conclusion that no one has anything to
If they wish to believe in something that I believe to be invalid, that's fine, I have no issue with that. I just want them to form said belief with
the understanding that there are other sides to the story, and to form a proper decision, they need to evaluate the notion with more than just one