Notice that I prefaced my comment with an acknowledgment that you wouldn’t like the argument - I know you don’t. That’s why I asked a question. Which you didn’t answer. Except perhaps to threaten to fight me if I threatened you. Since I’m fairly sure we won’t ever cross paths I’m pretty sure that’s a hollow threat - since I think you are referring to a threat from God - hypothetically - then I think you should fight it out with him.Nathan is essentially demanding that I obey him (or his chosen priests & prophets) because he asserts that he speaks in the name of god, and he denies any obligation whatsoever to justify his authority. Fuck you. If you want me to do something, then make me. All "subjects" can demand their "ruler" coerce them. So coerce me.
If God is not hidden and the “priest, prophets, pundits” are his chosen messengers then you have every reason to believe me and/or them. Why would God personally reveal himself to you because your logic demands it? That doesn’t make any sense. When does a subject ever tell their ruler what to do in that manner?
You can run around shouting QED all you like - that doesn’t make it so, it just means you’ve made up your own mind. Please leave others the same space to do so. Rather than declaring “game over” and dancing on our philosophical graves.
*I have no idea if Nathan will alter the content of the comment; he doesn't strike me as being any more honest than he is intelligent. I've reproduced the accurately and in full, adding emphasis to the particularly fucktarded authoritarianism.
Nathan, if you want to be a good little German, that's your choice. If you want me to be a good little German, fuck you. But don't think that you have any right to escape criticism and condemnation for your slavish submission to authority or your demand that I submit to your authority.