RE: In regard to the rational person's choice
April 26, 2015 at 9:25 pm
(This post was last modified: April 26, 2015 at 9:34 pm by bennyboy.)
Either God is an entity, and has been observed, or an idea, which has been inferred. In the first case, what observations, exactly, could show that something/someone is the Creator of all that exists? Burning bushes? Beams of light from the sky? Sudden curing of diseases? No. In the second case, whoever has made the inference must demonstrate that the inference is correct, or at least it's just the best inference that we could make. Has anyone been able to do this? No.
It should be clear to any rational person that religious mythologies are fairy tales. They go against what we can observe for ourselves, and provide no meaningful answers to any of the mysteries of life. I know of many cases in my life where people have told far-fetched stories, and been proven false; and I know of none where they have been proven true. Why, then, should the far-fetched stories of people 1500, 2000 or 4000 years ago be accepted? Does being born before the real understanding of science, or before the mutual education of millions of scholars working together in a history of peer review, qualify someone as MORE qualified to reveal truth? No.
The most rational choice a thinking person can make is to accept his own ignorance. Mystery doesn't need placeholder solutions; instead it should provide a sense of wonder and a desire to observe and to learn as much as possible.
It should be clear to any rational person that religious mythologies are fairy tales. They go against what we can observe for ourselves, and provide no meaningful answers to any of the mysteries of life. I know of many cases in my life where people have told far-fetched stories, and been proven false; and I know of none where they have been proven true. Why, then, should the far-fetched stories of people 1500, 2000 or 4000 years ago be accepted? Does being born before the real understanding of science, or before the mutual education of millions of scholars working together in a history of peer review, qualify someone as MORE qualified to reveal truth? No.
The most rational choice a thinking person can make is to accept his own ignorance. Mystery doesn't need placeholder solutions; instead it should provide a sense of wonder and a desire to observe and to learn as much as possible.
