Conclusions based on belief or disbelief in God are irrelevant to judging his morality according to the portrait painted in holy texts
As morality is entangled with reality, (incorrect) conclusions about anything are potentially relevant to judging morality.
I don’t see how it remotely mitigates any charges of vileness or insanity
I wonder how readily believers would, in a sort of plea bargain, accept and embrace the charge of insanity, with all its connotations, if it were thought the obviously attractive horn of the dilemma, with no other alternatives.
I’m imagining what religious institutions and literature would look like if, say, one out of every ten adjectives referring to a deity in hymns, psalms, etc. were replaced with “insane” or one of its synonyms.
snerk I’m sad to say that the answer is “rather readily, for some”. I’ve gotten into heated debates—heated because they ended with me throwing my hands up in the air, appalled at the willing ignorance of my opponent—about whether God follows the same basic rules of logic that we do. It’s astonishing. I’m sure if you were to start a Protestant movement saying that “God is insane, but we follow Him anyway”, you’d get followers by the truckload.
By Occam’s razor, we must conclude that the basic tenants of logic we have in this life will not cease to be true in the next. Then again, Occam’s razor depends on Occam’s razor for its veracity… :3 If you wanna talk about circular arguments.
And I agree with your statement re: incorrect conclusions; thank you.
As morality is entangled with reality, (incorrect) conclusions about anything are potentially relevant to judging morality.
I wonder how readily believers would, in a sort of plea bargain, accept and embrace the charge of insanity, with all its connotations, if it were thought the obviously attractive horn of the dilemma, with no other alternatives.
I’m imagining what religious institutions and literature would look like if, say, one out of every ten adjectives referring to a deity in hymns, psalms, etc. were replaced with “insane” or one of its synonyms.
snerk I’m sad to say that the answer is “rather readily, for some”. I’ve gotten into heated debates—heated because they ended with me throwing my hands up in the air, appalled at the willing ignorance of my opponent—about whether God follows the same basic rules of logic that we do. It’s astonishing. I’m sure if you were to start a Protestant movement saying that “God is insane, but we follow Him anyway”, you’d get followers by the truckload.
By Occam’s razor, we must conclude that the basic tenants of logic we have in this life will not cease to be true in the next. Then again, Occam’s razor depends on Occam’s razor for its veracity… :3 If you wanna talk about circular arguments.
And I agree with your statement re: incorrect conclusions; thank you.
EDIT: Man, this 10-minute lag is killing me. O_o;