(July 28, 2017 at 12:41 pm)Khemikal Wrote: In what axiom? The axiom of a hypothetical faith whose god is the god of human wellbeing and reducing harm...whose beliefs have not been described or expounded upon? Why would it be catastrophic if people worshipped such a god? It's been less than catastrophic with far shittier gods. Ultimately, it's where gods are heading in the mainstream anyway - with fundy breakaways being reactionary responses to the perception that god ought to be able to beat a bitch every now and again, to hold down some icky other that the adherents themselves don't like. A vocal few long for the good old bad old days.
Because there are no gods, as Bill Maher monologues at the end of Religulous, people sub in their own agendas and say it's god's will, so of course the appeal to THEIR authority is going to be fucking nightmarish. It's only because most people don't have the courage of their fucking stupid convictions that it hasn't completely been catastrophic to blindly follow whatever they perceive as the god's will unquestioningly. It's still an axiom that should earn someone a fucking course of shock therapy for using.
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.