happydolphin said:
You don't know the narratives and you don't understand their origins, yet you claim to disprove the Greek mythology from within its narrative. You also claim to find proof in the origin of the stories (where they came from) without having knowledge on them (or so it seems). From that vantage point, you appear to me as both a hypocrite and a liar. Either that or you are simply biased or terribly confused. Sounds cruel, but it isn't. It's reality. And I would be sad to see you grow up a bitter man hostile to religion because you were too biased to see the reality of things (i.e. that you haven't disproven anything substantial). Otherwise, you know something about the religions of which you claim to be so certain of their falsehood, but are hiding that knowledge from me. But even if you were hiding that knowledge from me, your blurring them together into one meltingpot, and then your denial of the importance of the differences in their narratives and origins renders that benefit of the doubt void. |
What? That is not what im doing. Disproving the narrative? I never talked about whats within the narrative, but of its origin. How can you possibly know that from looking at the book written by the person that came up with the story themselves? At best you could get circunstancial proof of some event, wich i assure you in no way will proves god exists. You realise they can have lied about everything cause you have no way to verify its veracity? How do you even know they werent allucinating? That doesnt prove the story real. I proved that Zeus does not control lightning and that its a perfectly logical and predictable phenomenon. Zeus was worshipped as God of thunder and i showed he cant possibly be in control of them.
You say im melding everything into one, when you are the one that refuses to learn and treats it differently from other situations. You have a bias in there, wich is why your analysis isnt accurate. Its your religion and thus must be looked at differently. I'm not bitter man sir, i am very kind and funny, but i dont lie to people when they deserve to hear the truth for coming up with thrash such as this thread. Unfortunely though, you are lieing to yourself, because you want to. I find it pretty arrogant that you believe something that is not proven, its substanciated by texts of questionable origin, questionable veracity, and proved to be false in previous such cases, But yes, lets forget all that and analyse like a whole new case, even though it makes no sense like i showed before with the loan money example. Its the example of not learning with your mistakes and keep doing them over and over.
You are free to lie to yourself sir, i know it makes you happy, but to call me a hypocrit and a liar is indeed sweet irony. The reality of thing is there is no proof of gods existance, and studies of human faith, behaviour and the way the brain works, aswell as examples of the past make it completely logical to conclude it isnt true. Besides you know... things that are imagined in the human mind dont just poof into this reality, but its perfectly possible for people to allucinate and believe they are talking to some divine entity.
