|
It's interesting how the term "rational" can so easily be subverted. Is it rational to believe in the non-existence of god? Of course not - it is not rational to believe in anything which cannot be empirically demonstrated.
To demonstrate this point, the atheist (classic definition) feels that without proof, there is no proof of god, ergo there is no god. The agnostic (classic definition) feels that without proof, there is no proof of god and without proof of no proof, there is god.
But what is proof? The existence of everything is proof of something. If it is not proof of god, what is it proof of? Let's make up a word for the cause of the existence of everything: Detrio. Detrio caused everything to be as it is or turned out to be. One must, by necessity, believe in the rationality of Detrio - we have empirical evidence of Detrio in the fact of our very existence. Whether Detrio has some variation of continuing conciousness or control over the everything that exists is irrelevant.
Detrio is god, the creator, the first cause. To not believe in it is denial of rationality.
Heaven and hell and virtue and faith and sacrament and holiness are all just tools used to control - either as a group over another group or as an individual over ones actions. Ultimately, they are all secondary to the question of whether god/Detrio exists.
|