This is the problem with hero-worship. You idealize the person and ignore their flaws; this inspires the battered spouse mentality that so many apologists adopt. Learn instead to separate the person from the lessons they may have imparted, and the content of their statements; the identity of the person saying and doing them is largely irrelevant. Religion quite backwardly doesn't realize this and we end up with the shitstorm we have on our hands now.
Let's also not forget he's not even the originator of his few good ideas so him spouting them is even more irrelevant. You get rid of the man, then you also get rid of all his bad ideas, but still get to keep the good ones because they're self-evidently useful. Otherwise you're making an argument from authority and that's moronic.
So, in a word, Yes. You're nuts. But fortunately that's not the same thing as being stupid, which is incurable. You still have hope.
Let's also not forget he's not even the originator of his few good ideas so him spouting them is even more irrelevant. You get rid of the man, then you also get rid of all his bad ideas, but still get to keep the good ones because they're self-evidently useful. Otherwise you're making an argument from authority and that's moronic.
So, in a word, Yes. You're nuts. But fortunately that's not the same thing as being stupid, which is incurable. You still have hope.
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.
