RE: The only way I could believe .......
April 25, 2017 at 11:07 am
(This post was last modified: April 25, 2017 at 11:10 am by Brian37.)
(April 25, 2017 at 10:46 am)Little Rik Wrote:(April 25, 2017 at 10:09 am)Brian37 Wrote: While I am not claiming to be a perfect human being, and never will, I have no history of violence or felony arrests for violence. I haven't even had a speeding ticket since 1999.
Yea, I am well on my way to being a serial killer.
Lecture me about morality when your claimed head character is depicted as getting revenge on a king by taking it out on the Egyptian First born.
Nope, what you are experiencing in your reaction is what is known as cognitive dissonance.
You not liking my rejection of your claims does not make me evil.
It never came in my mind that you are evil.
All it came is that you are super naive.
Good, then don't you fucking dare lecture me on morality. You not liking my book review of how a character is depicted in a book, is not my baggage.
Maybe you need to consider that that book reflects the tribal blind loyalty expected back then, in the times that the book was written, and has no application today because western society has grown up since then.
You are naive, not me. There is no invisible sky hero handing us morality. If an individual does good they do good, if an individual does bad, they do bad. No magic required, no old book of myth need to explain why humans do either good or bad.
It was understandable BACK THEN that loyalty was expected, because most humans lived under ruling royalty and BACK THEN the mortality rate was much higher, so it was far more important BACK THEN to tow the tribal line. And back then, not just in monotheism, but polytheism, the ruling class mistook their good fortune as coming from a divine place.
None of that character you call GOD, reflects our modern concepts of governing. He isn't elected to his position. The book uses words like, "lord", "master", "slave" and "servant" and "kingdom". BECAUSE that is what humans lived under BACK THEN.
The lead character called "God" in that book is not elected, does not need your consent to rule over you. He cannot be impeached if you don't like what he does. He can do whatever he wants to you and does not have to explain himself to you. He demands loyalty without question. EXACTLY WHAT HUMANS DID BACK THEN, obey'd the king.
How about YOU consider that and take your beer goggles off and stop projecting your idea of "morality" on me.
