Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseB5446
I think to say that you don't believe in God because there is no proof is to say that you don't believe in love. You can't prove/disprove love. Therefore we should hang that nonsense as well, right? Go tell your mom/dad/signifigent other/etc. that you don't believe they love you because they cannot physically prove it.
|
Total non sequitur. Please try harder. Love is a personal emotion with no hard and fast definition and depending on the person using the term can mean a range of feeling. God is a distinct, described entity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseB5446
Now who's saying "Believe what I believe or die"? You sound like one of those religious zealot types, only non. To reiterate Neopolitan, I'd be wiiling to bet that the majority of the non-believers in this forum have not read a Bible since the last time they fell asleep in church Easter Sunday umpteen years ago. How does one base his faith on a subject he's never studied? I'm not talking about reading it to pull out all the arguable pieces, but really studied it. We are talking about your eternal soul, maybe, right? You don't think that if it does exist it would be worth spending the time to find out for really real? What do you say to God (if he exists) and asks why you had so many years on the earth to study Nietzsche, Kierkeguaard, Marx, Pascal, Darwin, etc. but not Matthew, Mark, Luke or John?
|
Which I assume you've done of the Koran, Torah, Adi Granth, Dasam Granth, Homer's Odyssey (from a religious rather than narrative perspective), the Shruti and Shmriti?
The problem with Grand Narrative religions is they
all assume they're right. I'd rather piss off all Gods and know where I stand than hedge my bets on the wrong one (and, for all we know, the Buddhists have it right so you may as well focus on appeasing your karma rather than chumming up to a deity.) As for my response to God, I'd tell him if his prophets could write a decent book he'd be in with a chance. As it stands even Tolkien was more interesting, and that was very
fucking boring.
I'd also point out that Marx' writing played an absolutely vital role in the development of the modern world, both by means of politics but also the conditions under which people today live. It's important literature by merit of the effect it has on us in ways that other listed authors such as Nietzsche have failed to achieve. It's also quite ironic your use of Pascal as an example considerate of Pascal's Wager ...