Quote:
Originally Posted by tom31deecc FTW Also, the nature of God makes it impossible to disprove. The same way it's impossible to disprove a flying spaghetti monster. |
No, its the way you shield (Whether you realize it, or not.) the nature god by placing it outside of the realm of any rational and direct criticism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teh Ace I'm just really confused on whether to believe in God or not.
I just don't want to spend my life worshiping an invisible almighty entity. |
I am assuming that the only reason you are still even considering the notion of worshiping a god is that you do not wish to be cast in a lake of fire? Or are you trying to qualm your spiritual needs? Just keep in mind that you do not need to be religious to be spiritual, not at all.
I find it funny to compare ourselves to the average medieval, or ancestral person. Their knowledge on the workings of nature, science, technology, and geography would be so outdated that it would make even a 2nd grader embarrassed, but their knowledge on religion would still be beyond reach and criticism. What is more likely, that we have perfected our religious understanding of the world so very, very, very long ago, or that like all the other fronts on which these men were so incredibly wrong, religion was among them? But unlike science, religion is immune to progress. If you consider religious moderation a form of progress, then you are saying that not all of religious scripts (a.k.a the true word of GOD.) is applicable to the modern world. While religious moderation is a paradox, and a threat in its own, it still yields that religion and its scriptures is just become less and less relevant as we continue to explore and uncover the true mysteries of the universe and reality.