Originally Posted by hihiman1
All atheists fail to see that there are things that they can never understand no matter how hard they try.
And they therefore accept it as false. By accepting something is false it is very easy too "prove" it's "falseness". Such as a murderer who is brought to court. This murderer killed your mother. It is known by everyone that he is in fact the murderer, because he had a good motive, he would always seem to dance around the subject of his murder during interrogation, and talk as though he had done it, and even his entire family thinks that he had committed the murder and has deemed him unstable. BUT he has an alibi. And what about this alibi? He can prove his alibi. But did he really kill your mother? Yes. But his alibi says no. How can this be that he can prove this falseness, yet the justice system cannot prove the truth? And in the end the murderer had gotten away with your mother's murder. How would you feel?
If anyone had any knowledge at all it would not even be worth explaining the moral to them. But I will say it, for to make sure that my point is made.
In the story, the murderer had an alibi and "proved" it. The alibi was false, and yet everyone knew he did it, possibly through his motive, or his smooth talk, or even threats. But the point was that everyone knew that he had committed the murder. But they could not prove it due to lack of evidence. And in the end he was released.
In the story false was "proven" to be true, and the truth was deemed false.
Now why is that? It is because he hid all the evidence, and possibly had people give false alibis and statements. And there was no evidence so it was impossible to blame him for the murder. So does that mean that the murder was non-existent? Since everyone is positive that he murdered your mother, does that mean they're wrong? No. The court decided that since it was too difficult to prove the truth, they would just accept the false alibi. They accepted something that they could comprehend, or understand, something that they're brain could believe something as simple as: He has proof, you don't.
Therefore the followers that have once seen the truth have become followers of falseness, for the sole reason of the boundaries of the human mind:
It is impossible to accept the unproven, no matter how true it is. And it is impossible to not accept the proven, no matter how false it is.
So those that who break this barrier of the human mind, are not of this world, but of the next. And those in whom the barrier remains unbreakable, will forever remain of this world.
Atheists have not broken this barrier, as their mind is of this world and not of the next, they are blind. They are horses with blinders who may only see what is in front of them. They may only see the dirt road that lays before them. They may only walk on this dirt road that many others have trampled on. It is impossible for this horse to see the meadow that lies to the right of it, and it is impossible for this horse to see the shining mountain springs that lie to the left of it. Because it is not there, there is only the beaten path in which the horse has known all it's life. And in this beaten path lies the remnants of many other horses that have tread this path. Except these horses had turned their heads, and as their eyes glistened their blinders were removed and were free to linger in the vast meadows and drink from the fresh mountain springs... But not this horse, this horse will never turn it's head because nothing is there. There is only the beaten path in which it treads.
You must choose to seek the truth if you would ever have it come to you. Just as the horses that have accepted that the path that lies before them is the path best left untread, you to must turn your head so that your blinders may to be removed. And upon the removal of your blinders you will know the true path upon which you shall tread.
And they therefore accept it as false. By accepting something is false it is very easy too "prove" it's "falseness". Such as a murderer who is brought to court. This murderer killed your mother. It is known by everyone that he is in fact the murderer, because he had a good motive, he would always seem to dance around the subject of his murder during interrogation, and talk as though he had done it, and even his entire family thinks that he had committed the murder and has deemed him unstable. BUT he has an alibi. And what about this alibi? He can prove his alibi. But did he really kill your mother? Yes. But his alibi says no. How can this be that he can prove this falseness, yet the justice system cannot prove the truth? And in the end the murderer had gotten away with your mother's murder. How would you feel?
If anyone had any knowledge at all it would not even be worth explaining the moral to them. But I will say it, for to make sure that my point is made.
In the story, the murderer had an alibi and "proved" it. The alibi was false, and yet everyone knew he did it, possibly through his motive, or his smooth talk, or even threats. But the point was that everyone knew that he had committed the murder. But they could not prove it due to lack of evidence. And in the end he was released.
In the story false was "proven" to be true, and the truth was deemed false.
Now why is that? It is because he hid all the evidence, and possibly had people give false alibis and statements. And there was no evidence so it was impossible to blame him for the murder. So does that mean that the murder was non-existent? Since everyone is positive that he murdered your mother, does that mean they're wrong? No. The court decided that since it was too difficult to prove the truth, they would just accept the false alibi. They accepted something that they could comprehend, or understand, something that they're brain could believe something as simple as: He has proof, you don't.
Therefore the followers that have once seen the truth have become followers of falseness, for the sole reason of the boundaries of the human mind:
It is impossible to accept the unproven, no matter how true it is. And it is impossible to not accept the proven, no matter how false it is.
So those that who break this barrier of the human mind, are not of this world, but of the next. And those in whom the barrier remains unbreakable, will forever remain of this world.
Atheists have not broken this barrier, as their mind is of this world and not of the next, they are blind. They are horses with blinders who may only see what is in front of them. They may only see the dirt road that lays before them. They may only walk on this dirt road that many others have trampled on. It is impossible for this horse to see the meadow that lies to the right of it, and it is impossible for this horse to see the shining mountain springs that lie to the left of it. Because it is not there, there is only the beaten path in which the horse has known all it's life. And in this beaten path lies the remnants of many other horses that have tread this path. Except these horses had turned their heads, and as their eyes glistened their blinders were removed and were free to linger in the vast meadows and drink from the fresh mountain springs... But not this horse, this horse will never turn it's head because nothing is there. There is only the beaten path in which it treads.
You must choose to seek the truth if you would ever have it come to you. Just as the horses that have accepted that the path that lies before them is the path best left untread, you to must turn your head so that your blinders may to be removed. And upon the removal of your blinders you will know the true path upon which you shall tread.
Nigga shrooms are good aren't they?