While I wouldn't consider your comments a bad comment per se, it barely has anything to do with the main article. I gave you 3 starts actually. It's too offtopic to be 5, but it's a valid comment.
While those furries with religious beliefs are mostly christians, they aren't many. And given your comment is heavly based on the christian bible, there're not many people out there who could have enough knowledge to give a proper opinion on what you said in order to judge your statement to be logical, truthful or non-sense.
Religion aside, I'd rather infere the truth assumptio on the universe around me thru logic, instead of to whatever is written in book "x". After all, it's 2000 years old pretty much and there're a lot of misinterpretations for several reasons (not to mention fake bibles, yes they do exist).
After all, even though what we percieve of the universe is just shadows in a cave, I'd rather use logical reasoning in order to better understand the universe. While logics sometimes can be paradoxal, there's always a reasonable explanation that can be found, and that can't be false. This would prevent me into buying a lie. The rest is trust in people's words, as I can't be sure of pretty much everything in my life. But as along the common sense has a more logical and reasonable basis, there's no need to be too suspicious of everything.
And this is what your comment lacks of. While even most people wouldn't be able to know the context in where these biblical parts, it's not like it's impossible to literally use it out of context and fool people with it. I don't know you and a mean person could behave like that, so I rather stay with logical reasoning.
I for example can have, at best, an idea of what you meant, and I can understand that, and I agree with you. However I don't think you have provided enough explanation or philosophycal argumentation in order to clear express your mental process and conclusion. In the end, what matters is not that I agree with you, but rather why you've reached the same conclusions (or close enough) as I did, as it might be a mistake that COINCIDENTLY had the same conclusion. And that doesn't really count.
PS: This was a really fast reply. Take this as a coincidence.
While I wouldn't consider your comments a bad comment per se, it barely has anything to do with the main article. I gave you 3 starts actually. It's too offtopic to be 5, but it's a valid comment.
While those furries with religious beliefs are mostly christians, they aren't many. And given your comment is heavly based on the christian bible, there're not many people out there who could have enough knowledge to give a proper opinion on what you said in order to judge your statement to be logical, truthful or non-sense.
Religion aside, I'd rather infere the truth assumptio on the universe around me thru logic, instead of to whatever is written in book "x". After all, it's 2000 years old pretty much and there're a lot of misinterpretations for several reasons (not to mention fake bibles, yes they do exist).
After all, even though what we percieve of the universe is just shadows in a cave, I'd rather use logical reasoning in order to better understand the universe. While logics sometimes can be paradoxal, there's always a reasonable explanation that can be found, and that can't be false. This would prevent me into buying a lie. The rest is trust in people's words, as I can't be sure of pretty much everything in my life. But as along the common sense has a more logical and reasonable basis, there's no need to be too suspicious of everything.
And this is what your comment lacks of. While even most people wouldn't be able to know the context in where these biblical parts, it's not like it's impossible to literally use it out of context and fool people with it. I don't know you and a mean person could behave like that, so I rather stay with logical reasoning.
I for example can have, at best, an idea of what you meant, and I can understand that, and I agree with you. However I don't think you have provided enough explanation or philosophycal argumentation in order to clear express your mental process and conclusion. In the end, what matters is not that I agree with you, but rather why you've reached the same conclusions (or close enough) as I did, as it might be a mistake that COINCIDENTLY had the same conclusion. And that doesn't really count.
PS: This was a really fast reply. Take this as a coincidence.