Religion Wolff Religious Creeds Analysis

503 Words3 Pages
The article, based on a passage by R. Paul Wolff, addresses the topic of belief in religious creeds. The author states two ways of thinking. The first is that a person thinks there is no reason for believing in any religious doctrine. The other argument is a person does believe and has a personal commitment of faith. The author concludes that the person who has no faith in religion could watch religious debates go on and never be affected, either positively or negatively. The other conclusion is that a person who has even the smallest amount of faith in a religion should dive head first into that religion because of the promise of infinite reward. All other religions should be denounced because they are in conflict with his chosen religion. The author did not sufficiently support the premise of disbelief in faith and or religion. He states that if one does not believe in a religion then one can gain nothing from religious debates. This seems like a fallacy of division. It is not black and white. Someone might be ill-informed or not knowledgeable enough about the belief of a religion. One could be searching for answers and find them from information used in a…show more content…
One who is yet to believe, but is searching for a belief. That way you would have a staunch believer, an unbeliever and one who is undecided on either. Another way to improve the argument is to change the sentence about a believer being intolerant of other creeds, to a person who believes in a creed yet is tolerant of other person’s different beliefs. The author suggests believers should be intolerant of other creeds. To me, this says to defend your personal creed by all means necessary. Be completely intolerant of others’ creeds. Do what you must to uphold your own creed. The fact of the matter is there are millions of people in this world that are believers of many religions that live in harmony with and respect the beliefs of
Open Document