Orthodox Questions
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (31)
sorted by:
Of course they would; their worldview is based on nihilsim, literally nothing.
The advantage to religions, especially old ones, is not that people blindly follow them, but that they've been tested for thousands of years. Whatever questions you have, have already been asked and answered countless times.
Frankly, the idea that anyone can just "build their own set of values" which are able to account for both reality and human nature, within a single lifetime, is ridiculous. Even if you could, you'd be in your 60s before you could ever begin to start acting morally.
Socrates, a man who actually made the attempt, had his ideas leap-frogged by his student in his own lifetime, and the average man is far from Socrates. Even Plato's ideas seem quaint, even childish, by today's standards. Not because he was foolish, but because other great men who came after him expanded and reworked his ideas into a much closer approximation of truth, a process of refinement, not spontaneous creation.
I would also say that if you think Christianity can be boiled down to "be nice", you understand neither Christianity or "niceness". "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you" is far from nice, not if you posess discipline and self-respect.
False all around. The age of an idea doesn't correlate with the absolute validity of its principles but by an umbrella of other factors. For example, the power of who promotes it. An idea can survive for thousands of years and still be wrong. See flat earthers.
Do you need to rediscover the wheel to build a car? No. Similarly you don't need to build your values from scratch.. you only need to read what was written and logically establish if it's applicable to you or not. As a matter of fact, this is perfectly demonstrated by your Socrates point. His students were able to leapfrog him BECAUSE they learned from him first.
Finally you can go play semantic and "who's the better Christian scholar" alone. That doesn't interest me. Though I'll say that judging by the lack of humility in your post, you have a bit more reading to do.