[QUOTE="AnimeHendrix"][QUOTE="brightshadow525"][QUOTE="raspuns_24"][QUOTE="brightshadow525"][QUOTE="AnimeHendrix"]God isn't perfect, people's imaginations are. By idolizing some boogey-man in the sky, you belittle the reality of what's really going on, and destroy the scope of the universe and cosmos. Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it?
brightshadow525
Where do you see yourself after death?
Nowhere. I see it as going to sleep except that you'll never wake up and there's no dreams. The sooner you can accept this the better off you'll be.
Have you ever considered the possibility of God?
If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time. The reason organized religion merits outright hostility is that, unlike belief in Russell's teapot, religion is powerful, influential, tax-exempt and systematically passed on to children too young to defend themselves. Children are not compelled to spend their formative years memorizing loony books about teapots. Government-subsidized schools don't exclude children whose parents prefer the wrong shape of teapot. Teapot-believers don't stone teapot-unbelievers, teapot-apostates, teapot-heretics and teapot-blasphemers to death. Mothers don't warn their sons off marrying teapot-shiksas whose parents believe in three teapots rather than one. People who put the milk in first don't kneecap those who put the tea in first.
I think that was extremely unnecessary and quite repetitive and long. What I'm saying is to create the assumption, and axiom, that God exists, and that He is all that He's said to be. If I'm not mistaken, creating an axiom and making points to support it is part of the Scientific method.
Actually, I thought that was well written and descriptive. Good example too.
Log in to comment