B
Bar-AKA-Redzer
Guest
you never answered the most important question what do u feel u will gain from this? and how do you know when you will have it?
Questions about God?
- Thread starter worrywort
- Start date
Thelema
Well-known member
ok, fair enough....well, my honest answer is I don't know for sure what was going on 6000 years ago and beyond. But even if the Bible was written in the last 500 years, after thousands of other religions, I'd still be treating it exactly the same, purely because of the supernatural evidence it contains. Of course the question would emerge, why did God wait so long, but that's only after I've established that it's true. You may conclude from Gods timing that God is not good, but that doesn't mean that God does not exist.
But anyway, my best answer to the question, what evidence is there that God existed before 1500BC, would be this;
1. The cosmological argument, which states that
a] within our natural psychical laws it is impossible for something to come out of nothing,
b] at the big bang something DID come out of nothing
therefore
c] something SUPERnatural must have caused the big bang
2. Intelligent Design, which argues that this universe is too complex to have come about merely by natural selection and random mutation. The odds are too great. i.e;
a] if evolution requires DNA to work, then how did DNA evolve?
b] the Cambrian explosion - where the majority of life forms suddenly emerged in a very short space of time.
and as for knowable evidence that would be accessible to people of that time, I'd quote those two passages I gave before [Romans 1:19-20 and Romans 2:14-15] which I agree with. I believe people can know God by the moral law that is written on our hearts, and through nature. i.e. I don't believe you have to have a degree in philosophy to know God.
The question you need to ask first is, does god exist? Because if he does then forming a woman from a part of a man is totally possible. If God can create the entire universe which defies all our best known psychical laws, creating a woman out of a rib is gonna be child's play.
Imagine if the bible contained zero supernatural elements. That's hardly a God worth worshipping.
The very definition of the word, supernatural, is "a power that...violates or goes beyond natural laws". The cosmological argument, intelligent design, and prophecy are all evidences of a power that violates our natural laws.
I didn't say "he wasn't trying to be factually right", I said "this depends on whether you take the Genesis account to be literal or parable". I still expect the truth in parables to align to reality, but I also expect there to be deeper, spiritual levels of truth revealed aswell, something that a purely literal transcription would miss out on.
I strongly disagree and I think my examples show this.
To get an idea of the improbability of these prophecies you need to think of all the possibilities that could've contradicted the prediction. For example, how did Ezekiel guess that Tyre would become flat like the top of a rock. In the words of Peter Stoner, "The sites of nearly all ancient cities are marked by mounds of accumulated debris. I don't know of any other city where the ruins have been so completely cleared away." [link]And what about predicting that Tyre would never be rebuilt? "Nearly all old cities which had great natural advantages were at some time rebuilt. Tyre is in an excellent location and has an abundant supply of fresh water, so valuable in this land." [link]
ok, [without googling it!], would you be able to know what this prediction is in reference to [this is supposedly one of his best predictions];
In the year that is to come soon, and not far from Venus,
The two greatest ones of Asia and Africa
Shall be said to come from the Rhine and Ister
crying and tears shall be at Malta and on the Italian shore.
Now lets compare this to the Bible;
"I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves.....I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets....From the north I am going to bring against Tyre, Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.....he will...build a ramp up to your walls......His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust....They will...throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea......When I make you a desolate city, like cities no longer inhabited, and when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you....you will not return or take your place....You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign LORD." [Ezekiel 26]
Are you honestly telling me you see no difference between these prophecies?
I can't give you a full response right now, but I just couldn't resist your cosmological argument:
Check out the big bang theory. It does not state that matter came out of nothing, the matter for the big bang was already there. The matter already existed for an unknowable amount of time before the big bang. When people say the Universe began at that time, they don't literally mean nothing existed before that. Check it out for yourself.
Pookah
Well-known member
^ And there is my point proven? That video is all fine until he tries to act like we can apply our own limited Earth knowledge towards things we can't possibly know because we haven't traveled farther than our own moon.
I am comfortable saying I don't know. Believing that you know for atheists and theists is fine but don't inflict it on everyone else.
Why can't logic or science coexist with the divine. I think science is rather divine myself.
Edit: Not to mention quantum physics, that stuff is magical.
I am comfortable saying I don't know. Believing that you know for atheists and theists is fine but don't inflict it on everyone else.
Why can't logic or science coexist with the divine. I think science is rather divine myself.
Edit: Not to mention quantum physics, that stuff is magical.
Last edited:
^ And there is my point proven? That video is all fine until he tries to act like we can apply our own limited Earth knowledge towards things we can't possibly know because we haven't traveled farther than our own moon.
I am comfortable saying I don't know. Believing that you know for atheists and theists is fine but don't inflict it on everyone else.
Why can't logic or science coexist with the divine. I think science is rather divine myself.
Edit: Not to mention quantum physics, that stuff is magical.
Have you heard of the Hubble Space Telescope or the Mars Rover? Humans may not have travelled past the moon – but we've seen into the depths of the universe and sent satellites to other planets within our own solar system. No sign of the G-man yet. Quantum physics is beautiful – total randomness, just as how life evolved.
Though - I do have to agree. The arguments are too circular - only death will really tell.
Last edited:
Pookah
Well-known member
I meant human travel. Still, we haven't gone that far if you think of how many stars are out there.
Yes, the pictures are pretty. But we don't see a lot. We see gaseous clouds and whatnot but we haven't zoomed in very much. I just like to keep an open mind. Maybe its my Star Trek love. :
:
Thelema
Well-known member
ok, fair enough....well, my honest answer is I don't know for sure what was going on 6000 years ago and beyond. But even if the Bible was written in the last 500 years, after thousands of other religions, I'd still be treating it exactly the same, purely because of the supernatural evidence it contains. Of course the question would emerge, why did God wait so long, but that's only after I've established that it's true. You may conclude from Gods timing that God is not good, but that doesn't mean that God does not exist.
But anyway, my best answer to the question, what evidence is there that God existed before 1500BC, would be this;
1. The cosmological argument, which states that
a] within our natural psychical laws it is impossible for something to come out of nothing,
b] at the big bang something DID come out of nothing
therefore
c] something SUPERnatural must have caused the big bang
2. Intelligent Design, which argues that this universe is too complex to have come about merely by natural selection and random mutation. The odds are too great. i.e;
a] if evolution requires DNA to work, then how did DNA evolve?
b] the Cambrian explosion - where the majority of life forms suddenly emerged in a very short space of time.
and as for knowable evidence that would be accessible to people of that time, I'd quote those two passages I gave before [Romans 1:19-20 and Romans 2:14-15] which I agree with. I believe people can know God by the moral law that is written on our hearts, and through nature. i.e. I don't believe you have to have a degree in philosophy to know God.
The question you need to ask first is, does god exist? Because if he does then forming a woman from a part of a man is totally possible. If God can create the entire universe which defies all our best known psychical laws, creating a woman out of a rib is gonna be child's play.
Imagine if the bible contained zero supernatural elements. That's hardly a God worth worshipping.
The very definition of the word, supernatural, is "a power that...violates or goes beyond natural laws". The cosmological argument, intelligent design, and prophecy are all evidences of a power that violates our natural laws.
I didn't say "he wasn't trying to be factually right", I said "this depends on whether you take the Genesis account to be literal or parable". I still expect the truth in parables to align to reality, but I also expect there to be deeper, spiritual levels of truth revealed aswell, something that a purely literal transcription would miss out on.
I strongly disagree and I think my examples show this.
To get an idea of the improbability of these prophecies you need to think of all the possibilities that could've contradicted the prediction. For example, how did Ezekiel guess that Tyre would become flat like the top of a rock. In the words of Peter Stoner, "The sites of nearly all ancient cities are marked by mounds of accumulated debris. I don't know of any other city where the ruins have been so completely cleared away." [link]And what about predicting that Tyre would never be rebuilt? "Nearly all old cities which had great natural advantages were at some time rebuilt. Tyre is in an excellent location and has an abundant supply of fresh water, so valuable in this land." [link]
ok, [without googling it!
In the year that is to come soon, and not far from Venus,
The two greatest ones of Asia and Africa
Shall be said to come from the Rhine and Ister
crying and tears shall be at Malta and on the Italian shore.
Now lets compare this to the Bible;
"I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves.....I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets....From the north I am going to bring against Tyre, Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.....he will...build a ramp up to your walls......His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust....They will...throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea......When I make you a desolate city, like cities no longer inhabited, and when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you....you will not return or take your place....You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign LORD." [Ezekiel 26]
Are you honestly telling me you see no difference between these prophecies?
The cosmological argument contradicts itself in the first sentence. Nothing can exist without a cause; God exists without a cause...Violating the law of non contradiction. On that basis alone, it is false.
The matter already existed for the big bang to happen. The matter existed and that blew up in to the Universe we know today. No matter was created for the big bang, it was already there.
No, something supernatural, even if I grant you your two premises, didn't necessarily make the big bang happen and that doesn't point to a God of any kind, much less yours. And if something supernatural did cause it to happen, it doesn't say what supernatural force. False dichotomy anyone? Perhaps it was something that died right after the Universe came to be and maybe it was Mithra that did it, Oden, Zeuss, Ra and who knows how many others.
The Universe is too complex compared to what exactly? Show me a Universe that is so simple that God didn't do it? You don't know what a Universe God didn't make would look like? Argument from ignorance.
I don't know how DNA came to be and neither do you, although Google would solve that probably. That's an argument from ignorance and I'm sure you've heard about that. Just because we don't know doesn't mean we can stick God there. And the false dichotomy inherent in this argument should be obvious.
I don't know anything about the Cambrian explosion either and neither do you probably (see above)
This bad logic should be obvious to you, since you know about logical fallacies. You should be raving mad that someone would create something so obviously logically fallacious and call that proof of your God. Even if you believe in God, you should be seeing some of these arguments are just terrible. And I understand how you might have never given a critical eye to this stuff, but now is the time. Are you seeing the logical fallacies?
The problem is that many Christians believe the Bible is 100% literal. I'm not making up things about what Christians believe, even Christians can't agree exactly what the Bible is. I remember hearing a Catholic something-or-other talking about Genesis isn't meant to be literal at all. Some Christians don't believe the Bible is divine at all, but hold to it just because they think that it's the moral thing to do. And then you find infinite shades of gray in beliefs. So you saying that the Bible isn't meant to mean this and that, even other Christians are going to disagree.
We haven't even gotten close to getting anywhere near proving God, much less anything supernatural. Show me some evidence of something supernatural. People haven't even made a good case for ghosts, much less the Holy Ghost.
So what makes God worth worshiping? If you say that just because God exists, that has nothing to do with whether we should worship him or not, I'd agree. 99% of our existence as barely surviving, illiterate apes isn't making a good case for God's goodness.
Saying "I don't know why this or that" about Tyre is an argument from ignorance. Have you done any research on this? Because I have and it's pretty interesting, but I want you to research and find out for yourself. Don't you feel some burden to verify these things for yourself before you present them as evidence to others? I have to keep debunking this stuff when you should have done this yourself. Maybe God does exist and the Bible is the truth, but these things you are presenting aren't going to do it. I'm not being unreasonable and I'm not some logical smarty pants.
and Tyre was rebuilt:
:Nostradamus supposedly predicted Hitler, only he called him Hister. That's not so bad for a crazy person saying he can know the future.
Last edited:
Thelema
Well-known member
^ And there is my point proven? That video is all fine until he tries to act like we can apply our own limited Earth knowledge towards things we can't possibly know because we haven't traveled farther than our own moon.
I am comfortable saying I don't know. Believing that you know for atheists and theists is fine but don't inflict it on everyone else.
Why can't logic or science coexist with the divine. I think science is rather divine myself.
Edit: Not to mention quantum physics, that stuff is magical.
The problem you have is with absolute knowledge. We can't have absolute knowledge of anything whatsoever. The argument could be made that I can't even absolutely know I exist.
But we can know thing with a high degree of certainty. I know with the highest degree of certainty that I exist, but even that isn't absolute knowledge.
So when we talk about knowing, we can't ever claim to have absolute knowing of anything.
Your belief seems to hinge on that since we can't know, we have to assume something exists? But that's wrong. The default position is always disbelief. Until we have evidence for something, we don't believe it's true. Until God has evidence for him, we can't believe he is true. That's how it works. That's why you're innocent until proven guilty-no evidence, no conviction-no evidence, no existence.
Last edited:
Thelema
Well-known member
Because it matters what we believe.
I meant human travel. Still, we haven't gone that far if you think of how many stars are out there.
Yes, the pictures are pretty. But we don't see a lot. We see gaseous clouds and whatnot but we haven't zoomed in very much. I just like to keep an open mind. Maybe its my Star Trek love. :
Yes - I know what you mean, but the vastness makes it more unlikely that there is one god and more gods that are actually super-beings, like Q from Star Trek.
They would appear god-like - but not have any involvement in the creation of the universe. It's like those Russian dolls - name escapes me - within each doll there's another and within that, another. The universe could be so complex that it could be more complex than a god - if he was real. A painter draws a portrait of himself in his own image - and the painter within that picture does the same - and the painter within that, again does the same. You have this causality loop that never ends, and in the end we will still have unanswered questions. If god was real - and was self-aware, someone would have had to paint him/her/it into the picture, and something else would have had to do the same for ,it, again. If god is real - he's Alien.
Pookah
Well-known member
The thing is you are looking at it from the flip-side of what I am. Ideas are not the guilty party to my view. My something more doesn't have to be a deity. It can just be that my ego isn't large enough to believe we are the only life out there (surely not the most intelligent) and that the universe isn't "god" enough in and of itself.
Science has its own vagaries and there are theist and atheist and agnostic scientists that have formed belief within the realms of logic. A punnett square of faith for example. A science professor once used one to illustrate the value of believing or not believing.
My views stem a lot from psychology and what is beneficial for the brain and body of a person. Spirituality is a beneficial thing for a human being. Institutionalized religion perhaps not so much.
Why do you want to tear the comfort from other people? The OP's belief will carry her to her grave peacefully in old age. You, however, are a collection of molecules disintegrating slowly as we speak. Is this "misery loves company?"
My point was never to try to convince anyone of what to believe. I have arrived at my beliefs in an organic way, reading and experiencing and following what feels/computes as correct/believable. My point is that this back and forth you desire to have is so that you can feel superior to the OP by winning an unwinnable argument. Whoever wins here, I guarantee someone from the opposing side elsewhere would have something even better to say and then they would "win."
Its all just forming of words, shit talking, etc. Its great to discuss why you have come to your conclusions, but why attack hers? Philosophy can be presented in a less disagreeable way.
Thelema
Well-known member
Your flip side is ridiculous. If we believed in things for no reason, where would we be? You can't just say maybe and then claim that it that maybe should be believed with no evidence to support it.
Psychology? Where in psychology does it say that debate is wrong and every belief is okay? Show me where in psychology it is proposed that we should believe in religion? As far as I understand it, psychology takes the view that religion is a delusion and is only okay with it because it doesn't harm the person. Psychology itself is based on logic and that is why it itself is called a science. Psychology never has debates? There are never disagreements in psychology? In psychology, is every theory given equal ground? Trying to convince someone of something is what all science is built upon-evidence justifying belief and sometimes that means your belief must change and evidence is pretty convincing.
Your theory of anything goes falls apart the second a gay person is denied marriage because that's what God wants. The second a person goes to a witch doctor to cure cancer. The second a war is fought over religion. Where is your maybe anything-believe it anyway-don't argue theory then?
Logic allows us to step outside of ourselves and science is firmly seated upon it. Science takes us out of the dark ages into the place we are now. Once you trivialize logic and science, you've insulted all of human progress since the 1600s. God didn't take us to the moon.
I have no problem with anyone believing absolutely anything they want, but when they tell me that I must believe something because God says it, or something is true when there's no evidence for it, then we have a problem. Religion makes you happy? Go for it, but I'm still going to call it crap.
You have no idea what philosophy is.
Last edited:
B
Bar-AKA-Redzer
Guest
that question was for worrywort, who seems to not be able to answer it...
worrywort
Well-known member
You seem to have a presupposition that anything supernatural is false therefore any evidence of the supernatural must be false. Whereas I come at it the other way around. If there is evidence of the supernatural then MAYBE the supernatural is true. Which way do you think is the right way?
It doesn't matter whether the universe began at the big bang or earlier, it still needs a first cause. If you need an infinite chain of cause and effect events to reach today, we'd never reach today. i.e. if domino X represents today, and you need an infinite number of dominoes to fall to reach domino X, domino X would never fall. Therefore, there must be a first cause and it, itself, must be uncaused.
Yea, I absolutely agree. The cosmological argument is only used to prove that there must be a transcendent, immaterial, uncaused first cause. It says nothing of the character of God. It's just one piece of evidence in a body of evidence.
hmm...I'm not sure I follow. I look to the odds, and when I see odds that are so huge they're practically zero, I assume a higher power was involved. Just as, if I took a wristwatch and broke it into a million pieces, stuck it in a barrel, shook it up, then opened the barrel to find that the wristwatch had formed itself perfectly back together, I wouldn't say, "wow, what a coincidence. I hope one day science will answer it for me". I would conclude that there was a higher intelligence involved.
hey man, I'm really enjoying discussing these things with you. You seem like a very clever bloke and you present some really challenging arguments, but do you reckon you could try to lay off the personal assumptions about me and my research skills. It's kind of annoying! :
: If you could just stick to the facts and the arguments it'd make life a lot easier.no, not yet.
So people have different views. Some are right, some are wrong. Through arguments made with assertions and evidence we can find out who's right and whose wrong. Weren't you just arguing this exact same point with Pookah?
sorry Thelema, I'm a bit short on time. I'll try to answer this one another day.
I haven't said that once about Tyre.
yes
I want to make clear, that any evidence I've presented I've always tried to add a link to the source where I got it from so people can see for themselves. I don't claim to have unlimited knowledge of the universe. I'm just a guy in his bedroom. I get most of my information from books and the internet. I don't have a degree in philosophy or theology. I just love the truth and I believe it's out there to be found.
yea this was something that stumped me at first. But there are 2 arguments. 1. is that modern Tyre is called "new" tyre and is in a different location to ancient Tyre which is now under water. and 2. That any buildings built on Tyre have been from other civilisations. It'd be like New York being conquered, demolished, its rubble thrown into the sea and made to look like a bare rock, then centuries later some Indian community build a small village there, then later still some Greeks settle there too. Everything that made New York, New York, everything that gave it its identity; its power, its political presence, was gone.
I have to say I'm quite baffled by your response to the prophetic evidence. To me its very powerful. Tyre is just one example. There are thousands of fulfilled prophecies in the Bible. Even if we reduced all the odds to 1 in 2, 50:50, when you multiply it out the numbers still get really big real fast.
If you'd have argued either a] that the prophecies were written after the events, or b] that the historical record was inaccurate, or even c] that somehow the 40 different biblical authors, from 3 different continents, over the 1500 year period, were all in on this elaborate hoax that involved a combination of carefully crafted prophetic trickery, then maybe you'd have a case. But simply comparing it to Nostradamus I just can't believe. But hey, that's fine, if you'd like me to move on from the prophetic evidence, then I'll drop it.
the Rhine and Hister are rivers
worrywort
Well-known member
hey Pookah, I know what you mean about these debates. Sometimes I think, why can't everyone just get along?! and it does worry me how I might be coming across. People probably just see me as a self righteous, arrogant know-it-all! :Pookah said:
: but I'm afraid to say I think I agree with Thelema. The truth is the truth. Some beliefs are right and some are wrong, and the best way to find out whose right is to talk about it. The reason I think it's important is because if a person has a core belief that is false, it can have huge implications for the rest of their life. If your view is that people shouldn't inflict their views on others, how do you get that message, itself, out without inflicting it on others? do you know what I mean? You've just had to inflict your view on me, condemning me for inflicting my view on you!
I really hope I'm not causing any unnecessary hurt to anyone, although I do think the truth can hurt sometimes.
But I don't argue to win, I argue in the hope that the truth will win. I don't only hope to change others, I'd like to change myself too. I want people to expose weaknesses in my beliefs so that I can fine tune them and rid myself from false thinking. Of course it's a lot nicer when you win. I think it takes a very brave and honest person to admit when they're wrong.
if you feel like sharing what you believe I'd be really curious to hear? I promise I won't pick holes in it without your permission!
Last edited:
worrywort
Well-known member
that was a very good video! I watched it twice!!! it'll take a while to digest I think!
worrywort
Well-known member
haha! Nice to see you back Redzer!Redzer said:
hmm...what do I feel I will gain from a life as a Christian? There's a parable in Matthew 13:44. It goes like this,
"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field."
I guess, in God I hope to find an answer to all my deepest longings. A friend when I'm lonely, a light when I'm lost, a comfort when I'm sad. I want to have a personal relationship with the God of the entire universe! I want to know God. I want to understand God. I want to experience true love. Not the romantic Hollywood kind, but that pure, absolutely unconditional, overwhelming love that a Holy God has for his creation. I want God to help me find the right path through life. I want to change into the best possible version of myself and I want God to help me.
hmm....yea....plus a free ticket into heaven wouldn't go amiss either!
well, heaven, I won't know for sure til I'm dead. But I can look to all of Gods other promises in the Bible and see if they've been fulfilled, and build confidence that way.
Another thing I feel I've already gained is the Holy Spirit. God promises to send it down into your heart when you believe in him. How do I know I have the Holy Spirit inside me? That's tougher to prove, but ever since I became a Christian something deeply changed inside of me. Not just an ooey-gooey feeling, but my actual desires changed. I began to enjoy reading the Bible, and I became obsessed with theology, and I started crying whenever I saw a tree! lol! which I know is absolutely gay, but hey, that's what happened! It was like all my senses heightened, and I could see the difference between right and wrong much clearer. [I know this all probably sounds very self-righteous, but this is just how it felt]
If God is true, you could gain everything you've ever dreamt of. If not, then, hey, life goes on as usual. I'd say it's at least worth investigating.
...patience
Lea
Banned
Pookah
Well-known member
You aren't debating. Everything you say is condescension trying to elicit response. By inflicting I mean that you and the OP are trying to force your "rightness" on everyone else. Nice analogy w/ the gay orientation. Someone being gay and standing up for their right to be so isn't infringing upon you, however if they tried to tell you being gay was the right way to be and that you should see the truth of it being the one and only orientation, then that would be infringement.
Atheists can contribute quite well to wrong in the world too. They aren't somehow exempt.
I'm not inflicting my beliefs on you or the OP since I am not telling you your beliefs are wrong, just your insistence on bothering everyone else with it. These arguments have been done to death. They are anathema on internet forums.
You can form theories about whatever stance on this issue with available knowledge, sure, but it isn't considered fact. If the proof is there either way where are the experiments and data and scientific journals backed up by others and the entry into education as FACT.
Psychology is a science mired in differing philosophies. Much of it can't be called "fact" like in other science. The psychology of consciousness for example, which has a lot of Descartes. The mind-body problem and such which you talked about a little. When you are learning about subjects in psychology there are many definitions and theories for one problem. More than one accepted even. Speculation and theory. Good stuff.
Philosophy isn't even majorly about this religion debate. And it isn't rigid like you would have us believe.
We live so short a lifespan and the universe has existed and will exist much longer than we will. A discovery tomorrow can very well demolish some thing we hold true today, it has happened.
I realize both the internet troll aspect and proselytizing aspect of this thread and it annoyed me. My tiny sentence was meant only to warn that this is where this kind of thread ends up. Sometimes messier and with more foul language.
Therefore because I am not here to convince either of you, only wishing that you had more tact and tolerance, I am leaving the "debate." Have fun all.
~A parting gift. A nice article for both sides. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574405030643556324.html
Last edited:
Thelema
Well-known member
hey Pookah, I know what you mean about these debates. Sometimes I think, why can't everyone just get along?! and it does worry me how I might be coming across. People probably just see me as a self righteous, arrogant know-it-all! :
If your view is that people shouldn't inflict their views on others, how do you get that message, itself, out without inflicting it on others? do you know what I mean? You've just had to inflict your view on me, condemning me for inflicting my view on you!
I really hope I'm not causing any unnecessary hurt to anyone, although I do think the truth can hurt sometimes.
But I don't argue to win, I argue in the hope that the truth will win. I don't only hope to change others, I'd like to change myself too. I want people to expose weaknesses in my beliefs so that I can fine tune them and rid myself from false thinking. Of course it's a lot nicer when you win. I think it takes a very brave and honest person to admit when they're wrong.
if you feel like sharing what you believe I'd be really curious to hear? I promise I won't pick holes in it without your permission!
Exactly right. Beliefs matter because they effect our actions. It is very important to have the right beliefs and having disagreements with other people is the way we come to realize what we believe isn't shared by other people and we have to be able to support our beliefs. If you think you're right, speak up!