The World Beyond BetterMost > Anything Goes
Atheists: Come out, come out, wherever you are
delalluvia:
Richard Dawkins' speech countering the Pope's claim that Hitler was an atheist.
Good listen
&feature=related
Brown Eyes:
--- Quote from: serious crayons on May 29, 2010, 09:40:04 am ---I'm not sure you'd even have to get into human evil, and whose "job" it is to control it. You could simply ask, why would a loving, caring, omnipotent god allow tsunamis and earthquakes and hurricanes? Obviously those cause untold misery, probably at least as much as that caused by human evil, but they're "acts of God."
If there's an omnipotent god, and that God is also "loving and caring," then either God's definition of loving and caring, or God's ultimate loving and caring purposes, are so far beyond our understanding that there's hardly any point in trying to grasp God's intentions.
All humans share some basic moral assumptions, whether they follow them or not. But it's clear that our moral assumptions in no way match the way the world operates, even in its "natural" state, that is, without human intervention. Since God, if there is a god, is presumably in charge of nature, then one has to ask why God's morality seems so out of sync with ours.
--- End quote ---
I agree with everything you say here. But, I'd also like to add the observation (and it's part of the core of why I question religion/god, etc.)... that the idea that human morality and "God's" morality should in some perfect scenario match-up... is human-centric. If humans believe that god is in charge of the universe (including all elements of creation), why should a god always be so connected to human concerns or interests? Maybe a tsunami has some great benefit to some other natural aspect of the world (maybe somehow beneficial to sea life, say) unrelated to humans.
Religions, to me, seem to be stories about people. People are a teeny-tiny part of the universe... not to mention only one species of countless here on earth. Why would a god always be focused on human concerns? The fact that so many religions or all religions, are human-centric to me indicates that these are myths/stories devised by people to deal with human fears, etc. And, things like Greek myths and Egyptian religion seem to be case studies in this... we see those myths as stories or almost literature now... but they were actual religions for hundreds and even thousands of years.
The idea that a long-established religion can be completely thrown over-board is a really interesting and perhaps cautionary tale for current religions.
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: atz75 on September 20, 2010, 11:46:57 pm ---But, I'd also like to add the observation (and it's part of the core of why I question religion/god, etc.)... that the idea that human morality and "God's" morality should in some perfect scenario match-up... is human-centric. If humans believe that god is in charge of the universe (including all elements of creation), why should a god always be so connected to human concerns or interests? Maybe a tsunami has some great benefit to some other natural aspect of the world (maybe somehow beneficial to sea life, say) unrelated to humans.
--- End quote ---
Well, that's a good point. When I think about the tsunami, I think about seeing Jon Stewart making fun of Star Jones (then a co-host on "The View") who apparently said something like, she had planned to be in the area that day but something interfered and she wasn't there, which she attributed to God watching over her. So Jon Stewart pointed out (humorously, of course) how absurd it was for Star Jones to think that God would be sure to protect her, but obviously didn't care about all those other thousands of people. What a weird god that would be. Which raises the question of why people even bother to pray that, say, they'll get that promotion at work or whatever. Why would God care about that, yet let other people endure far more dire or tragic situations?
But you're right, not only is there no reason to think that God cares more about Star Jones than other people, there's not even reason to think that God cares more about people than other creatures.
Marge_Innavera:
--- Quote from: atz75 on September 20, 2010, 11:46:57 pm ---I agree with everything you say here. But, I'd also like to add the observation (and it's part of the core of why I question religion/god, etc.)... that the idea that human morality and "God's" morality should in some perfect scenario match-up... is human-centric. If humans believe that god is in charge of the universe (including all elements of creation), why should a god always be so connected to human concerns or interests? Maybe a tsunami has some great benefit to some other natural aspect of the world (maybe somehow beneficial to sea life, say) unrelated to humans.
Religions, to me, seem to be stories about people. People are a teeny-tiny part of the universe... not to mention only one species of countless here on earth. Why would a god always be focused on human concerns? The fact that so many religions or all religions, are human-centric to me indicates that these are myths/stories devised by people to deal with human fears, etc. And, things like Greek myths and Egyptian religion seem to be case studies in this... we see those myths as stories or almost literature now... but they were actual religions for hundreds and even thousands of years.
The idea that a long-established religion can be completely thrown over-board is a really interesting and perhaps cautionary tale for current religions.
--- End quote ---
"Process theology" has a few things to say about that. A fairly good summary is at http://www.ctr4process.org/about/process/GodUniverse.shtml
I can't speak for Louise in replying to reactions about "God's job"; but she isn't the first to make a point about expecting the Creator to be Mr. Fixit:
At Auschwitz, the question: "where was God."
The answer: "where was man?" (William Styron)
Needless to say, process theology is considered a heresy, by religious and atheist fundamentalists alike..
louisev:
Here's my take on it, and I don't sweat anything about Star Jones thinking God was watching out for her or whatever. God is not a guy, and is not vindictive, God is the sum total of all of the natural laws and forces that govern the universe, and is, at the same time, consciousness itself - the consciousness of the universe.
We don't sit around and ask whether gravity is evil when someone falls in a ravine and breaks his neck. However, those who believe in a personal, anthropomorphic God, DO believe that God has a hand in these workings of natural law. Is there 'bad' gravity and "good gravity' - bad gravity is the kind that causes you to fall in a ravine and break your neck, and the good gravity is the gravity that keeps you on the surface of the earth and not float into the Sun? No. There's just 'gravity' - with all of its implacable working.
And that is how God works, whether fundamentalists like it or not. The contradictions and limitations that fundamentalists grapple with as articles of faith are caused entirely by their view that God is some sort of super-guy, and supernatural, and in actual fact there IS nothing outside of nature. God is the sum total of all nature.
Whether Star Jones was saved or not is not really in God's job description. That is a factor of her karma and her plan for her incarnation. If she wants to chalk it up to God well good for her, but just like blaming God for gravity allowing you to crash in a ravine, giving credit to God for your own personal karma is just as erroneous.
In case anyone wants to know what this point of view is, it is called mystical pantheism: the belief that God is immanent AND knowable.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version