posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 12:51 AM
This is a bit of a blog post I wrote a while back that covers some of my basic moral objections to the idea of a God and why I am opposed to organized
religion. I hope you can take something from it and please feel free to give me your thoughts on it.
"God is Good"
Or, well, he’s ok. Or maybe sometimes he’s kind of a jerk. But at least he’s not just blatantly evil, right?
I have absolute confidence that if God were to have his lengthy list of acts truly scrutinized as harshly as we would a human’s, and then if we were
to compare that God to today’s villains, Bush and Cheney would almost appear to be philanthropists in comparison.
But honestly, what if we were to actually gauge the actions of God on the moral scale? Is he really ‘goodness’ embodied?
(All references to ‘God’ in this essay are to be understood as the Judeo-Christian God, though many concepts can be easily applied to other
Murder. Genocide. Tyranny. Extreme Irresponsibility.
An adult human being guilty of any of the above crimes is, of course, to be held highly accountable for them – likely with severe consequences.
Likewise, any person in a position of leadership or power is to be held even more accountable, as they are given greater responsibility — Just as;
conversely, we do not expect much responsibility or action from an infant. So is it not fair to say that an omniscient and all-powerful GOD should at
the very least be held equally as responsible for his actions if not exponentially more so than the average man or woman
Let’s say a severe car accident occurs between two vehicles. Both parties are extremely injured, putting them in critical condition. It is highly
unlikely that either will survive without immediate medical attention. The paramedics receive their emergency call, but instead decide to go out to a
nice lunch, and not concern themselves with duty or responsibility. Both victims of the car accident soon perish, as their wounds are neglected and
they are left to die.
Is there anyone who would not consider this morally reprehensible? The paramedics – who have within their power a likely means to aid and possibly
save the victims — instead decide to ignore that power completely and check out for the day. Our system would condemn them and put them behind bars
for such a disgusting display of apathy and irresponsibility.
So if a God who sees all things, and with a snap of his almighty fingers can heal all wounds and solve all problems (requiring far less effort than
the paramedics must offer on a daily basis), yet he chooses to ignore this crisis – is he not to be deemed morally despicable? Is he not to be
examined with an even GREATER scrutiny?
He would already be aware of the problem, since of course, he sees everything. He would be capable of an effortless and immediate solution, yet
chooses not to employ it.
And when a child dares to ask why a loving God would allow such a thing, the child receives the equivalent of a slap in the face to his or her
“Oh because God has a plan, and allowing two people to die painfully from severe crash wounds is quite obviously a necessary and indispensable part
of it…He works in mysterious ways, little Bobby. Best not to ask questions. We can’t expect to understand.”
Now, let’s move on from irresponsibility and discuss actual proactive violence and destruction
First of all, what sort of ridiculous notion suggests that you should follow the laws of a God that does not even follow his own laws?
Murder is bad for you and me, and punishable by eternity in hell — but the one who created that law can drown the entire Earth in a massive flood,
get away completely free, and we’re supposed to find that acceptable?
I can’t possess mild jealousy, but God can be so jealous for human worship and devotion that he can have a sadistic contest with Satan to see which
of them Job likes better when everything and everyone in his life is utterly destroyed?