RE: Truth in a story which is entirely dependent upon subjective interpretation
January 4, 2017 at 6:26 pm
(January 4, 2017 at 5:36 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:(January 4, 2017 at 5:05 pm)Astonished Wrote: You know what's amazing? If we stopped teaching children to talk, all over the world, in a single generation all of humanity will have forgotten all about all concepts of god (at least as established) and will need to learn to do everything all over again from scratch. Why would god build this defect into his creation so that a massive event that would kill off adults (like that one episode of Star Trek) might leave children stranded in this way and make them go feral, if he supposedly has built knowledge of him into our hearts and has a flawless ability to communicate if he chose to? Surely if feral children with no spoken language of any kind could still be made to understand divine language. Any theists want to touch this point?I'm not a theist, but I would like to say something.
If god can communicate flawlessly with some divine language, why did he choose instead to communicate through the flawed translations of an original manuscript that conveniently no longer exists?
Because he either didn't give enough of a fuck to make it clear to us, or he's merely the fictional, fevered imagining of very, very flawed and more primitive humans than us.
Any other theories would have to be less credible than these two extremes.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
