|
The thing is, speculation about where God is or isn't, and what He can or can't do, and what He might or might not like, is all dependent upon two things: that a given person has faith in the existence of God, and that said person is willing to gamble that religious traditions might perpetuated at least in part by other folks who had faith, and who might even have experienced revelation, which might make at least some of their claims about God worthy of consideration as in some way accurate.
But it does come down to faith, and unfortunately, faith is not something rational, it is arational, and cannot be demanded by external proofs. One either acquires faith through experience of something that one defines either as revelatory or miraculous (it is still called faith after such an experience because those experiences, even if real, are still subjective, and may be proof to oneself, but not to others; also such experiences tend not to answer many detailed or abstruse questions), or through a decision to believe until one has more conclusive subjective proof.
The problem is that those who claim to have faith are far too cavalier about demanding it in those who do not, and those who do not have faith are far too cavalier in dismissing it in those who do. Frankly, I think it would be nice if everyone just decided that as long as everyone else acts like a mensch, what everyone else does or does not believe about a Supreme Being and the origin of the universe is of no concern to them....
__________________
Dull sublunary lovers love,
Whose soul is sense, cannot admit
Absence, because it doth remove
That thing which elemented it.
(From "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" by John Donne)
|