In the name of God

[C1ay]

Arabs blow themselves up in his name. Irishmen blow each other up in his name. Imams and Ayatollahs treat women like animals in his name. Priests molest children in his name. Arabs blow up jews in his name. In his name there have been bloody crusades, mass-murdering conquistadors and torturous inquisitions. Organizations like the Ku Klux Klan and the Aryan Nations arise in his name. Leaders like Hitler and Hussein claim to rule in his name. Why is so much evil commited in the name of the one deity that is supposed to represent all that is good? Do these men really believe that any God would condone all of this in his name?

[Queso]

they must, to do those things..

[kaelcarp]

The Christian God is either not all-loving or not omnipotent. If it were all-loving and omnipotent, it would stop pain and suffering, or at least make it so that we didn't feel those sensations, and would align the universe so that there would not be a need for them. Either it is not actually all-loving, or it is not omnipotent enough to do that.

 

There's an interesting little deity contrstuction test here:

 

http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/whatisgod.htm

[Biochemist]

Do these men really believe that any God would condone all of this in his name?

Radical folks are not homogeneous, but we know for a fact that many of the folks labeled as "islamic fundamenaltists" have admittied that their terror is for political reasons, not theological ones.

 

Ther are extremist people in all categories. It is a shame that some extremists are theistic, and propagate a soiled image of their Creator.

[Biochemist]

The Christian God is either not all-loving or not omnipotent.

This is the opening round of the question "Why is there evil?". It is probalby worth a separate thread, but suffice it to say that standard Christian dogma allows for:

 

1) an omnipotent, loving God coexisting with evil that is not of His own making, and

2) the same omnipotent, loving God having a role in vengeance, for activities against His name.

 

This is the most prickly sticking point for most 21st century Americans. Very few Americans (in particular) readily accept that a loving God would allow people (that He loves) to suffer.

 

I concede this is counteruintuitive. However I do not rule out ideas that are counteruntuitive. That would rule out significant fractions of quantum physics and higher mathematics.

[Fishteacher73]

 

1) an omnipotent, loving God coexisting with evil that is not of His own making

 

Maltheism asserts that the problem of evil is not a problem at all—the initial question has a simple answer, there is no way that a benevolent omnipotent God would allow evil in the world. Therefore, it is reasoned, God is either not benevolent or not omnipotent if at all.

 

 

Marx proclaimed religion as the opiate of the masses. Religion has been used as a tool for the justification of everything from genocide to slavery. It is quite easy to see how the manipulation of popular religion has been used to control the masses to help either fuel revolt or maintain the status quo. Does this make religion the bad guy? I really do not think so. Just as a gun is not evil, it is the misuse of said tool that is the problem.

[Biochemist]

Maltheism asserts that the problem of evil is not a problem at all—the initial question has a simple answer, there is no way that a benevolent omnipotent God would allow evil in the world. Therefore, it is reasoned, God is either not benevolent or not omnipotent if at all.

I do understand this line of argument, but the simplest argument is often not true. It is certainly not true in physics or biochemistry. I have to admit I chuckle a little when folks assume that the Creator of the universe would be simple to understand. If He actually is the Creator, it might be fair to assume that His nature is similar in complexity to His creation. That is, it just might not always be readily intuitive.

....Religion has been used as a tool for the justification of everything from genocide to slavery...Does this make relifion the bad guy? I really do not think so...

Agreed.

[Fishteacher73]

Ohhhh....Can we bring up Occam's Razor again now?

[Biochemist]

Ohhhh....Can we bring up Occam's Razor again now?

I love this!

 

Well, my point above about is that folks often try to make God a little too simple. The point of Occam's Razor is to shave off parts of a theory that are not necessary to explain the facts. If you use a razor to shave off some facts to fit your theory, that would not be the razor that belonged to Occam.

 

Buford, maybe. Yes, Buford's Razor.

[Fishteacher73]

My dog growing up was named Buford....And he did NOT shave...

 

There not too long ago was quite a heated argument about Occam's razor, that was part of the sarcasm in my post as well as just to reference the the lack of necessity of a third wheel of god.

[Biochemist]

My dog growing up was named Buford....And he did NOT shave...

 

There not too long ago was quite a heated argument about Occam's razor, that was part of the sarcasm in my post as well as just to reference the the lack of necessity of a third wheel of god.

Sorry I missed the history.

 

And I am really enjoying this discussion (in case it was not obvious.) But I do really wish we could have this talk over a beer.

 

Getting serious for a moment, I have never thought it reasonable to use theism as an "out" to handle the unexplained. But it is useful to offer God as an answer to obvious contradictions that are poorly addressed by the scientific method (like reconciling free will and determinism). These examples are not truly proof cases, but they are certainly not irrational.

[lindagarrette]

I do understand this line of argument, but the simplest argument is often not true. It is certainly not true in physics or biochemistry. I have to admit I chuckle a little when folks assume that the Creator of the universe would be simple to understand. If He actually is the Creator, it might be fair to assume that His nature is similar in complexity to His creation. That is, it just might not always be readily intuitive. Agreed.

The problem with trying to understand God is that all the supposed evidence is based on hearsay mostly from uneducated tribal rulers who carried over pagan rituals from even earlier eras. There is nothing new or changing. It seems all avenues toward understanding this phenomenon have been exhausted several times over. Meanwhile, science is continually opening doors for us to explore. learn and grow in our understanding of the universe and our role in it.

[Biochemist]

The problem with trying to understand God is that all the supposed evidence is based on hearsay mostly from uneducated tribal rulers...

LG- I already offered the example of the apparent contradiction between determinism and the apparent existence of free will. I am pretty sure this was not a critical argument from tribal rulers. This is a contemporary discussion.

 

I suspect that the causality of the Big Bang was not often on the discussion list of tribal rulers either.

[Freethinker]

Good people have always and will continue to do good things. Bad people have and will do bad things.

 

It takes religion to make good people do truly bad things.

[Biochemist]

Good people have always and will continue to do good things. Bad people have and will do bad things.

 

It takes religion to make good people do truly bad things.

Interesting postulate, but a postulate nonetheless.

[pgrmdave]

I think that there is a simple answer to why there is suffering with an all-loving and omnipotent God - God loves all of us equally, completely, and he is like a parent. For those parents out there - would you allow any harm to come to your child if you could prevent it? Think seriously about this. Would you choose to err on the side of allowing your child freedom to be hurt, or on the side of keeping your child safe? I assume that you will then notice that you could stop others from hurting your child, but would you stop your child from hurting others? Would you not want your child to be free to learn, and be good? If you control your child's goodness, is it truly good? Now with God - He loves each person as his child, and so does not want to prevent us from being free, because it wouldn't help us be good. The best he could do was to send teachers, to try and teach us how to be good.

[Freethinker]

Interesting postulate, but a postulate nonetheless.

Ya look at all the atheist suicide bombers!