|
To me he doesn't offer anything except a visceral response to other people's intelligent questions. And that much is based on his semantic arguments, saying that God is everything, you are apart of everything, and that 'God is you'. He thinks he's making logical sense (but won't admit it) even where there is a presupposition that God actually exists, or that God means something more than just "everything" when there's no logical basis for saying that.
He basically bastardized the english language in my opinion, using logic to his own ends and using his own rules as he sees fit. example: Logically if God is everything, then I am God and I am you, and we are God. Ok, now use logic to prove that God exists. Oh well logic isn't good enough now that you ask me to do that. Ok, you pick and choose when you want to use logic.
It's bullshit.
To me "everything" isn't something you worship, it's something you observe and study in awe. God is on the same level as anything else. It's no more important than lima beans, which may be important, but the inherent value is still subjective. We are lima beans, all is lima, you are lima, it makes no difference. So what? I got more out of I <3 Huckabees with the white sheet analogy.
__________________
We are all atheists about most of the gods that society has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.
-Richard Dawkins
|