- I am angry at God because I suffered a traumatic event as a child.
- God has not yet chosen to reveal to me his presence.
- I don’t want to have to stop doing all the evil things I love doing.
Only when you wrong that which does not exist, can there be truly no limit to the penalty some wish on you.
If god allows nature to run uninterrupted, it can be argued that suffering is a justified consequence of matters equilibrium, but if every instance of history has been meticulously scripted, God must be a sadistic sociopath.
“I tortured and crucified my son so that I won’t have to torture you for an apple your ancestors ate, on the condition that when you read about these events thousands of year after their supposed occurrences, you don’t question them.” -God
What are love, art and the question of spatiotemporal limits, if not evidence of something more? Can evidence be inconclusive? “I don’t know!”
Can human being’s confidence they know the will of a creator be construed to justify any immorality? Are all claims to know the will of a creator, equally questionable?
Can empathy exist without revelation? Does ‘survival of the fittest’ negate the notion of empathy?
Can negativity be positive? Should evil be hated?
Is ‘hope’ of value when it’s false?
Had you the means to invent conscious beings, that experience, joy and pain, would you? Is G-d love?
It is not merely ‘an ism’, but ‘the ism’.
If most religious people would claimed that the profound nature of the Bible leads them to suspect that its claims are in fact true, I would be more inclined to agree, but since most of them insist it is unequivocally true, without access to anymore information than that available to me, I can only assume their certainty is more a product of wishful thinking than actual.
On the other hand if they do in fact have information unavailable to me, how can they attempt to convince others, when we simply aren’t equipped to understand?