The logic in that is hard to find
I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings, but this man also said better be safe than sorry
NASA also said better safe than sorry...
Car manufacturers say better safe than sorry...
Many people say better safe than sorry...
I dont really get what you mean by that.
NASA and car manufacturers say this, based on logic and physics. They are saying this because charts show electronics might fail and people do crash.
There are no charts that show how many Christians were wrong or atheists were right (or vice versa). The sentence "Far better to be Christian and wrong than to be Aethist and right" is downright egotistical in itself, it is not based on logic or physics, it's a personal failsafe if people go about it this way, and definitely not because they truly believe.
I have literally nothing against people truly believing and living their lives according to a religion, but it should never be for personal "gain".
Would you rather, people only becoming religious for this one and only reason? Do you think it would benefit the church in any way? Do you want people to join a church only because it's better to be safe? Then, what is the point of it?
If people do this, it should be for the right reasons, not to con.
Are you saying, that God will say no to people who have treated others with respect, did no wrong,... generally lived a "good life", but weren't religious?
I did not saying any of that (and for good reason).
Then I have misinterpreted this:
Now, pretend you are an Aethist. You spend your whole life believing that 'we' are all that exists. No heaven, no hell, no supernatural being... just us. If you are wrong, and there REALLY is a heaven/hell, then you could have just missed out big time.
and non-religious people don't necessarily miss out on the big party at all.
If so, why bring up the whole "Far better to be Christian and wrong than to be Aethist and right"? You'd be better off just living a good life, rather than being religious.
People claim to know the answer to getting into heaven, nirvana, valhalla, etc. They also claim to know which religion is the true religion.
What if you are wrong, and should believe in Odin, Thor, and Loki in order to enter "heaven"?
If I am wrong, then I am wrong. You just basically said what I just said, that we all could be wrong.
Except, you brought it up first. If we all could be wrong, why mention it? What is the power of your statement when you replied to aristide1 ("what if YOU are wrong") if it's not a true conviction?
Maybe I am reading this wrong, but your post suggested that it's better to be safe and be a christian, than being sorry if you're an atheist. Saying we could all be wrong doesn't empower the suggestion you offered.
It is rather more noble to help people purely out of concern for their suffering than it is to help them because you think the Creator of the Universe wants you to do it, or will reward you for doing it, or will punish you for not doing it. The problem with this linkage between religion and morality is that it gives people bad reasons to help other human beings when good reasons are available.
Easy question! It is more 'noble' to to 'it' because of pure concern for people. You make it seem that people who believe in God somehow lose their sense of humanity. This is not the case, there are a good many Christians who genuinely care for what they do. At least, that is my speculation.
No, I don't make it seem that people who believe in God somehow lose their sense of humanity. I merely state that people who don't
believe in God can still
have the same humanity. If humanity counts at all, being religious doesn't matter on judgement day (if there will ever be one), all that counts is living a good life, regardless of religion. So what's the point?