Whether there exists in this wide universe a creator, ruler, or engineer who has constructed not just us but all things both living or dead, is debatable -- however for the purposes of this document I will assume that such a thing exists, and that I will also assume that he has control of the conscience of people, and I will also assume that this God is not only able but has controlled the conscience of people, and have used it to create various religious texts. These texts in themselves are all different in their own way, so I will assume that only those trends common among all documents is true -- and that these together are the guides that this God has deemed suitable that all man should follow. Assuming all of this, I will now continue.
To the lord which rules all, to the king of all kings and the ultimate architect, to the creator of my being and all else under the sun, I have come to the conclusion that I must respectfully question these guidances of yours. I am no god myself, nor will I likely contribute any great ideas or works like many of my own peers, so please have the graciousness to excuse me if I have any faults in my speech. The majority of your laws on mankind are very well conceived, and I do admit that I personally believe that they go great lengths to defend at least some kind of order in our place in your machine. That being said, there are also a few discrepancies, and though perhaps a being of your nature could have no mistakes, I do pray you to at least consider what I have to say.
You have stated many a time that the killing of oneself is that of ultimate evil -- that the murder of another man is itself a sin, but refusing the gift of life that you have given is an even greater crime. Well, I can tell from my own knowledge that a man values nothing more highly than himself, and the idea that a man would simply take himself away in spite, or in excessive modesty, may not be unheard of, but it is very rarely the truth. You see, in the final moments of a man’s life when he intends to destroy it, he thinks not of you at all -- and if he does, he prays to you, and tells that he is sorry to both you and his fellows to what he has done. Or perhaps he is smitten with anger, and does lash against you -- but this is rarely your fault, and rather some men’s way of dealing with pain. Perhaps I am wrong to assume, but I would think that you would know all of this better than we know it ourselves. If that is the case, why hurt the already hurting man? Why call what he does a crime when his crime is that he believes there is nothing else left for him?
I understand that in entirely neutral judgement there is no path of sympathy, so do not pity these men -- but rather realize in their feelings pain and suffering, and know that they are going through a Hell in itself. There is certainly no place in Heaven for these creatures, but their place in Hell is just as unreasonable.
And how could it be that refusing a gift could be any worse than taking one from another? It is in some places in your kingdom that refusing a gift is a courtesy, but it is in all places that taking anothers is a crime. Why insist one thing in our world that is not the same in the other? Is this judgement not flawed?
But I do understand that this could simply be that you wish for men to realize that there is always still hope, and that going through such a pain and enduring it is in fact an achievement. And so you put fear in them so they still try to endure, and that they hopefully will stop considering the thought. If this is your meaning, I understand.
Repentance is as well an issue in itself. You say that if men go against their sins, then they are forgiven, but if they do not do it in time then they will be sent to eternal damnation. Have you forgotten man's capacity for lying? Have you forgotten that life is a fragile thing?
Perhaps you wish for men to do it everyday, and you can easily see whether they truly believe it or not -- but is forgiveness really all that is needed to gain access to a greater future in death? Does a compulsive liar eventually believe what he says is the truth?
Another great sin is the love of one’s self above all others. Though I could see both excessive pride and unhonest modesty as crimes against others and themselves, is not self confidence the greatest self-rejuvenator of all? Too much of anything is a dangerous thing, but in some cases too little is just as bad. And to once again say that such an easily measurable thing is much worse than murder, which is rather something so heinous and stays with you forever, seems to not be the best hierarchy of all.
My final argument is the one that I’m sure many have argued to you about before, but I intend my discussion of it to be much less emotional and much more reasonable.
Why does the act of war exist in us, but not in any other species? It cannot be that we are too sophisticated, because war itself is started upon weakness (jealousy, greed, perhaps even excessive pride). And an even greater question, at least for me personally, is why do you support such a thing? In multiple religious texts you have stated that, although it is preferred that it does not happen, if it comes down to it then it must. That is not the words of a God, but rather a king who sits on his chair and tries to play with whatever power he can get. I struggle to understand the exact meaning of its existence, and although there are some explanations for it (Pandora’s Box, Adam and Eve) I feel like these do not come directly from you, but rather your followers in their own attempts of explaining why these things happened. If war continued, I would be unaffected -- I am asking for this explanation on the side of reason, and why it would be implemented into the greater scheme without any true meaning. Indeed, the entire act of war is vestigial at best, and yet leaders will continue to do it because they believe there is no better choice. That means that my original idea of ‘perhaps this is something man must unite and come out of’ is incorrect -- if that was true, war would’ve ended a long time ago.
I understand that someone like you is likely not used to criticism, and I would be the first to admit that perhaps my points were more sharp and my words more poetic at the beginning of my speech, but understand that this comes from another gift you have given us named procrastination. Still, I hope you can at least take some of these points into consideration.
---
Twitter: @CodexofAegis
Facebook: facebook.com/CodexofAegis
No comments:
Post a Comment
Number one rule: Don't be a dick.