…God exists but I don’t believe in him
“We all agree that god exists” (and we are pretty sure that
we read the right book)
Kind of attitude that we see all around, that is trying to
present some past tense (ancient past tense) situation as actual nowadays, is
not surprising or difficult to understand knowing how humans are reasoning. Many
are still trying to present all people as believers, just of different
religions and deny existence of those who do not believe in god. They are
recognizing us, they are debating with us, but in their public positions they
are holding attitude towards atheism as to of-side minority thinking. They even
like to discuss that atheism is a faith as well, describing it as having a
non-belief instead as lack of belief. Like if “not to believe” means a verb “to
not believe”.
It is all fully understandable. Discussion with the atheist
involves whole different questions and arguments then the one with believers of
another religion. You can discuss endlessly whose prophet is the one who really
spoke with the true god. You might even convince the other guy to convert if
you are very good with interpretations and very suggestive. But with the
atheist you can not argue on which kind of clothes they should ware to please
your version of higher command. You can not discuss higher cause or purpose of human
existence, because they (atheists) recognize none. You can not debate on how
you can deserve to be saved and live happily after you die.
To “god doesn’t exist” you can not argument except with “yes
it does!” And to “why should I think so?” you say “because I believe so.” And,
don’t get me wrong, I agree that, if you believe that god exists, it actually
does exist for you. Something that you are spending so much time visualizing,
so much energy talking to in your mind, in return must be really affecting your
life. The fact that you believe that it exists makes it truly existing power
that also in reality runs your life, how you behave in it and with it.
If it’s helping you find a good direction and feel happy with
yourself, your imaginary friend is welcome to stay in your hospitality as long
as you are willing to host him (her, it, them – how ever you are picturing it).
But in real reality that is just your mind picture, shaped by mind pictures of
many who were imagining before you.
You have the right to believe in it (just as you have a
right to believe in what ever you chose), but the statement that god exists is
just and assumption. Assumption from which further, those who claim to have
true evidence in hand, extract their right to draw borders of interest between
each others and obtain infinite reach to both impose philosophy and prescribe
rights to everyone on their territory. Just like drug cartels. (They do both in
one or two places, so has been told)
No one should have the possibility to impose their version
of human order. Not even to their children. You don’t have right to prevent
other human being, be it your child, from deciding themselves what they want to
believe in and by which order they want to live. We are all teaching our
children some beliefs and values. But I don’t mind mine hearing about your
views. I wouldn’t go so far as advising them to, for example, marry one your
believers, but I would encourage them to talk with your children on social media.
(If she ends up being happy to ware someone’s version of prescribed clothes,
means that my story held less water then yours. And I will not be disappointed
as long as she feels happy with her status.)
…No one will escape the final judgment!
What if, and I don’t have the illusion that I can persuade
you if you by chance believe in god but, what if god doesn’t exist? You would
have to question all that you ever did in the name of what you thought god has
prescribed as righteous action. There are so many things that person can end up
doing to please the one they think has a power. Same as belief in god allows
you do delay questioning of your actions and live life without responsibility
for what you have done to others. As god is what ever we decide to imagine, he
is usually forgiving what ever we do, especially if we do it to someone to whom
we do not subscribe same level of intimacy with god. Belief in god is a perfect
excuse for avoiding logical and rational social interactions. At the same time
we intend to secure abolition from social justice for what we are doing to
others, as we are relying on a final judgment (amazingly everyone is expecting
that god will forgive; counting that he’ll acknowledge our special
circumstances probably).
Like in cases where Orthodox church is judging the
child-molester. “If he is guilty, god will judge him anyway. And the worst
punishment for him in this life, if he is guilty, is to live with the
expectance of own death and facing that judgment, which, afterwards, will lead
him straight to hell where he will burn for ever.” (If he is not sorry enough,
in which case he’ll be forgiven) “So no need for humans to judge, he is the
member of the church, god is there responsible for order anyway… And fear from
what will happen when he (the god) intervenes (which happens conveniently after
you die), is the worst punishment and source of suffering for the one who is
waiting with unclear conscience.” But god is said to be responsible in all
cases. And all should beware final judgment if they performed certain actions
(in fact, they should have been afraid from it on time to prevent themselves
from doing harm to other person, as fear from god is supposed to serve that
purpose originally) But if everyone is to meet it (finale judgment), why don’t
we all stop recognizing the crime? Why only priests who sexually abused
children have a right to enjoy till the end of their life, because of assumed
punishment that comes after? Why not leave it all to the god? Why waste for the
whole gigantic legal system?
But what if there is no god? Because we don’t all agree
about it a priori, you know. There are those who don’t really believe, but
pretend to believe because they don’t care and they do not wish to waste time
socially for discussing that. And there are those who can not pretend to
believe to excuse closing their eyes before what you are doing with it
(conception called god). What if we are right? Since you don’t have proofs to
convince us otherwise, there are too many mystical events and logical nonsense
that are insulting for the common sense, we have to disbelieve the whole
concept. What if there is no god, hence final judgment will reach no criminal,
just as reward will not reach the righteous? But even if their would be a
finale judgment; on which bases society should estimate when to rely on it and
let the criminal enjoy the time of this life? Or is one’s crime lesser if he is
self-proclaimed god’s servant?
In the bottom of their vanity, everyone thinks that they are
god’s favorites and that their personal chat with god (about how they love him
and stuff) will insure that god will favor them after death despite a few
inhumane horrors that they’ve done. Taking god as an ally is considered an
excuse for absolute arrogance and total lack of compassion for those looked
upon as god’s outsiders. But what if there is no god? How arrogant would you
then feel? Knowing that you are going to die and disappear just as everyone
else?
Despite how you like to present us to yourselves, atheists
are very humble people. They have no illusion that anyone invisible in charge
has chosen them among all people. They recognize both own fragility and other
people’s humanity. If there is no god, you simply have to realize that you are
only your mom’s favorite. And you have to come down from your “the chosen one”
bubble and understand that no one has naturally more rights then others. No one
is giving you more right except if you take it forcibly.
…Everyone will be judged according to their deeds
But what if there IS a god? It is fair ask and you should
ask that question.
I know that this question is supposed to scare and shake the
core of any radical positions in a matter, which by itself is to be taken as if
your point has been made.
“Better believe, because if he exists then you’re screwed!”
(not to be hypocritical, but just to be on a safe side…)
Nevertheless, you are talking about supernatural omnipotent
and omniscient power. I lack belief in it. There is nothing on a “safe side”.
At least nothing worth living for. What exactly should I fear to choose the
safe side? What is that thing doing in practice? Suffering of innocents is not
selective on religious grounds. It doesn’t recognize religious discrimination. Neither
are guilty ones punished very often or selectively. How can we determine based
on that who is being rewarded and who is being punished for their beliefs and out
of beliefs conceived actions? Supposed deity, of which projection you are
manipulating with, has done nothing so far to prove that it’s on your side, or
that it appreciates more your way of life, so why would I fear it because you
believe in it and fear from it? There are people who are afraid of ghosts,
those who fear aliens, some believe in witches and vampires. Should I fear them
as well (vampires and all)? I do fear some people who believe in them, of
course. As I do fear some people who believe in god.
I don’t see anyone punished for their way of life. Not even
those lunatics visiting peoples’ funerals calling their death “god’s punishment”
and a little boy who died in fire a gay or something ‘sinful’ as that. But what
you call way of life, in reality is to favor ones on account of others. That’s
not way of life. That’s oppression; and you can not have it accepted as way of
life because of the nomenclature you choose to use. Lucky for you that there is
no god to judge you and put you to hell.
…The supernatural brain chemistry
Nevertheless, if there would be a possibility that some such
entity exists, thus in a sense of it’s supernatural origins perceived to be all
knowing, and therefore perfect as well in it’s judgment, I sincerely doubt that
such entity would possess vanity described in your scriptures. Rules of which
braking is pissing that creature off, if you stand aside from your personal
beneficiary politics, are far from what you’d expect from universal creature to
be a creator of.. So if I think of myself in terms of being wrong about
existence of some judgmental power in a position to decide who has done good
and who has done bad, I think that questions asked in that trial will not be
those that you listed from the information that you gathered from your sources.
And I somehow can not picture that spoken owner of the indefinite power would
be driven by some personal interests. I mean, that creature supposedly possesses
everything. He would be so happy in his perfection that he wouldn’t be capable
to even get slightly irritated, let alone getting really pissed off. Man, the
god wouldn’t even possess nerves, as he would have never used them (presumably
he has no body at all, how is he working out adrenalin?). Why would something
perfect develop something useless?
That is a general question in this topic, by the way: Why
would something perfect create something imperfect and then have to be pissed
off with it for ever after? What was he missing to come to idea to create
anything in a first place? And what was he doing before he created everything?
Making plans? But even if he created it (for some reason) why would his mood
depend on his creature’s obedience? What is his unfulfilled wish that can drive
him towards greed (Pope and the guys collecting all that gold and joules…)? In
fact, why doesn’t he finally go trough with that final judgment, or appear, or
what ever? What is he waiting for? Is there not enough righteous people who
died already to fill up the heaven? Or he is still sentimental about the model
and doesn’t want to pull it out of production yet? Maybe he just has more souls
to be put on the test on the stock that he made before; just that no one was
having so much unprotected sex any more. I mean – why all this time? What is he
doing of the higher priority? Show yourself! Protect your creatures! Why not?
Why do they have to sin and repent, punish themselves and suffer? Is this some
kind of kinky game out of the pure boredom?
...Who holds whom and for what? (Right to ask questions)
As a matter of fact, if god existed, I would be looking
forward to meeting that creature in person. And I believe that both sides in
that meeting would have right to ask questions, in dead. I would personally
have a list of other questions for the supernatural all mighty guy. If I
believed in him I’d definitely write it down and have it on me when ever might
happen that I die. As it’s creation (and supposed to have been follower. While
I was alive, because we are presuming here that I am now dead when I am meeting
god, don’t we?), I would engage seriously in questioning him (god, what ever it
appears to be) what is the meaning of some of the signs that he is sending us
as a proof for his existence and his all mightiness. Such as millions of dieing
babies and that kind, what is the actual meaning of that sign? And I would, if
you excuse me, like to hear it straight from his mighty mouth (when I encounter
HIM), not from you about how your mouthy reverent persuaded you to let go of
the matter. Because you are all the time, as a reference for your answers,
using someone who you never met and some people that you met, and who are referring
to same source they never met either.
I don’t buy that creation has no right to question its
creator. How would that apply? I can beat and rape my children; they have no
right to question the treatment? If I create intelligent sheep, who can talk
and think, I will have to listen to it, won’t I? I can not just slaughter it.
I’ll have to take its view on her accommodation and nutrition as well if I
suddenly end up connecting self consciousness to a creature. So, I guess, if I
am wrong (honestly, if there would be a slightest indication that there is
continuation of life after death of a physical body under the rules of
functioning of this universe I would be the first to cheer to it and celebrate
the possibility of not dieing for ever), therefore if I am wrong and someone can
give me a reason to realize it, and I end up faced with the one who made it all
happen, it will be an honest debate. I don’t know what non-circumstantial the
all mighty will find on my account, but I see myself putting a lot of stress on
his behavior with his attributed powers.
Oh, come judge us already!
…What the hell do you think of him?
Even if I wanted, I could not have any fear from what your
stories have to say about what happens after material death of a body. For me,
if anything comes after, it’s a simple unexpected benefit, and will not be, in
any aspect, anything even slightly like what you decided to let your mind
imagine. Contributing moral codex, impregnated with the concept of your
(natural) domination, to the definition of how the distinction is made between what
deserves pleasure or suffering, in a state when supposed nonmaterial force is holding
our consciousness together, and after it loses it’s biological habitat, can not
be really something that would count on the other side (after death) if that
side happened to exist despite all proofs and all the logic. And I don’t think
that such a perfect, and therefore perfectly good willing creature, would award
you for inviting for a gang rape, labeling individuals who qualify for being
submitted to such treatments as, for example, “all female over the age of 14
that are widowed or divorced”. For god’s sake. (!)
I know that you have been promised, in a book that you read,
to get number of virgins and stuff in your imaginary scenario, if you fight for
some cause. But those are not some characters from some mythical story. Those
are real people with real bodies and real brains. They are suffering for real
and they are able to recognize and understand what is being done to them. Do
you really have the call from your ‘all mighty’ to proclaim that? Or is it some
other, more earthly cause which, as well as the deed, only proves that you have
no illusion, or real recognition, of any “all mighty power” above yourself? In
fairness, if you think about it, only faith in god can be an excuse for such
unbelievable cruelty. If there is no god, there is simply no excuse for
violence. That’s logic. And if it (the logic) is given by supernatural, than
it’s supposed to be given to you as well. As you claim to be in touch with the
direct source, no one gave me such an idea. (But wait, wait, wait! Maybe god is
sharing also logic unequally? All to those who do not believe in him.(?)) In
fact, you are claiming and taking more power than it’s natural and inventing
some divine prescription for that. It has been prescribed by your book and,
conveniently, presents you as beneficiary. Your position in argument is that
you do not have to prove yourself as it was already proven by mysterious events
someone has described as happened in the past. You tend to ad your own mystical
experience as most solid proof, hence no reason for questioning. I heard young
girl saying. “I was asking Jesus to reveal himself to me. I was telling him: -
If you are real, reveal yourself to me! - And he did!” She is
Jehovah-witnessing now around India
and Nepal ,
collecting for the Christian herd among the poorest and most neglected. Just to
connect, every member of the church (at least in this part of the state) is
giving 10% of their monthly earnings to the church. Such is a custom. When you
get a job, you give whole first salary. That is also a custom. And you are
happy to give. Your priest will pray for you with more enthusiasm.
Even if you take “there is no proof that god doesn’t exist”
as a proof for its existence (which couple of science lessons should make you
ashamed to have ever concluded), you have missed the essence of how, what you
call “god”, would reason and resonate if it would exist. Otherwise, you have a
right to believe in supernatural if you find it applicable to you and
affirmative for your personal achievements. If you keep claiming that something
(god) which is otherwise good is making you do things which are otherwise bad,
then it becomes a matter of a society to strip you of the power to implement what
you are intending to. Or if you do not do things which are otherwise good as
trough a perception of god they look to be bad – like not stand in a protection
of a girl who is being molested by a group of man, because “she is not supposed
to be out in a street, so late, if she is a decent girl”, then schools should do
something about it.
…A “perfection” in dead. And what is the use of it?
In a sum of all logic, the creature, entity… (or in which
ever shape one could present something non existing to themselves) called god,
as described by those who express themselves as believers, involves essential
controversy between prescribed values, supposedly given by it, and own
attributed fairness; and as such is unsustainable even as a believable SF
conception spiced with lot of filling gaps with self-affirmative imagination.
In fairness, we all deserve same rights. So in fairness, the mighty powerful,
if existed, would share that stand. How do you mean “god gave man power over
woman”? Circumstances and opportunities gave man power over women. If such
entity or power (eternal and universal) existed as the source of goodness
(hence should be good to all, shouldn’t it?), you went a long way in deciding
how much of that goodness should fall onto your territory. God is a man. He
favorites man.
There are cultures that recognize goddesses too. Those
cultures favorite man as well. They worship goddesses and despise real women.
You have a right to believe that it is how it’s supposed to
be, and not hear what others have to say about it, because your priest told you
so? There is no way any “all-knowing in it’s fairness” creature would come to
the idea to prescribe hierarchy of any kind. Why do you think that the mighty
being would want some of his creatures to enjoy and others to suffer? Or some
are supposed to enjoy being beaten? And… why by the way? And I don’t mean only
gender oppression. We have so much inequality in the world that no righteous
and omnipotent power would be able to watch it without proper intervention.
Except if, beside being supernatural, all-present,
all-knowing and all-mighty, he is also a sadistic pervert who turns on to pain
torture and pain.
If god exists, what is a use of him? To judge how much did
we love him while killing each others? If I had his powers I would fix a thing
or two on this planet.
You found god’s love and you are all blissful. You are full
of yourself for doing charity. But you are overweight. Babies are dieing of
hunger because their mothers do not get enough food and you eat too much. How
can you be so happy? How can you be peaceful? Or is it your good deeds that
require all the suffering, so that you can show off before god? I am not happy.
I can’t be happy with so many others suffering. Doing charity doesn’t lift me
up. I wish I was born in a different reality, in which there is someone good,
smart, honest, decent and responsible in power. In this way, each one of us
must be that one.
…What can I do about the sad fact that I was born?
I want to be happy. And, ideally, I would like all the
people to be happy. There are few reasons for that and at least one of them is
selfish.
I want to live in peace and enjoy my life. When people are
unhappy, they tend to become aggressive and aggression spreads like decease. And
then someone is getting hurt.
It, as well, makes me feel good when I think other people
are happy, as it makes the world look better.
I see others as they have only one life too. Only this much
time to live and enjoy. To cause pain?
But even if it wouldn’t be so, why in the haven’s sake would
some self-content creature (such as god would have had to be if he existed),
would create something to make it suffer? Now, later, for that, for this? Why
not fix? It would be his creation’s functioning after all that he wouldn’t be
satisfied with.
You totally misconceived even that imaginary perception. And
you can stick to it as long as it helps you with figuring out the purpose of
life. But you can not still keep a right to enslave people because of it.
Maybe someone is happy to be disciplined when they do
something wrong and can call it their own choice; but if it’s a consent to
submission because there is no other socially available choice that guaranties
more, but rather less desirable circumstances, then it’s not really a consent,
is it? It’s more a mimicry. A surviving technique; that values life to the
point of just being alive... “I’ll be beaten and raped part of the time;
otherwise I’ll be covered tip-to-toe and engage with children and cooking.” And
who did I hear saying they want that? If you claim that you are in war for
souls, let’s see how many did you make happy with your policies? Or you think
that children should see some purpose in own dieing from HIV? Maybe they are
paying for the sins they will never have a chance to commit?
…Dangerous psychopath though, but fair man. Big believer!
When you say that church did more good for the world
(especially Christian believers, but also Christian apologists, incline to
underline this frequently), what do you actually mean?
-did a lot of good in the world (of which system of power
and hierarchy is also created by church)
- is to credit for the development of the modern, western,
liberal culture (which is good unless you are watching it from the outside of
the bubble, while you are dieing of hunger. Then you see that bubble suckling
in all the resources that could have served you for years and throwing away the
benefits at the gambling table),
-sponsored education (thought people how to: give money to
church, obey the ruler and serve system better) and art (paintings of mythical
creatures in elated or horrifying scenes)…
what else… yes: charity.
-helping poor (Giving back, used and half broken, what we
took from them in generations; helping those, who otherwise don’t matter to the
society to, maybe, survive. And if they survive to maybe have enough to eat
every week?)
To them you are saying that they are supposed to love god?
Why? To them he doesn’t seam to be showing much affection? He would be supposed
to love us all equally, so what could make him not notice those? To them you
are saying that church did more good then bad? Or you are not taking them into
account. If you would, that would seams to be just one-sided good.
…What does she know? She is a woman
Another thing that church, in a sense of organized religion,
did extremely good, is to teach male domination to both sexes. Furthermore,
male domination and control of women’s sexuality is named to be intrinsically
linked to the persistence of cast/class system. Every religion has given a
right to a man over woman in principle. Man has a right to order, woman has a
duty to submit. It was like that for ages for very natural reasons lying mainly
in physical size and reproductive function. Woman is described by all religions
as to have less of a brain, so to say. And that used to be true in a sense that
women used to possess less of an understanding of the world, thus for less to
offer. But if understanding depends on exposure, then it was also natural situation.
Women were not ever before new ages receiving any education neither they were
in a position to make their own decisions. I don’t know if women naturally have
less desire for power, but they simply didn’t have a power since organized
human society started. Now when we evolve from the primitive “Hero and his love
and his concubine” mythology (as the economic reasons for such social structure
have expired some centuries ago, and long before the structural change began),
and stop telling the kids what they must do with their gender, we are receiving
equal results in every field of studies and work. Still, all organized religions
propose female submission and all the crap that goes with it, such as beating
her if she is misbehaving to discipline her. “Misbehaving”(!) In practice, what
it is, is giving to a man a right to misbehave. If she complains – she is
misbehaving. And then – you know what happens. A yes: it was also advised to a
man not to misuse this right (lol). Who has never been out of power thinks that
arrogance is natural state of mind. Why the right if not to use it? (Power
makes one selfish, doesn’t it?) And again, what was the use of women
oppression? Keep her for yourself and do what ever you want, isn’t it. It’s
nice to have such right, isn’t it? Why not take it if no one can stop you? Why
not use it if no one will judge you? Why give it away when you have means to
keep it? You have whole social structure built to secure that right. Your
position is that you should be in power because it’s an actual fact.
…Discussion with the dick-heads
You can prove your positions only when you stop applying
them to everyone forcibly. Let them be informed that they, as humans, have a
right to be treated in a better manner, and supply them with social options to
chose for different treatment for themselves and let them THEN chose to submit
themselves to your oppression. How can you otherwise claim to represent half (or
more) of the population? Otherwise you are just one social group denying rights
to other social group. Group of man against group of women. And since you have
more physical power you make the rules and ways to impose them. And beating
seams to have proved itself as a fast and efficient way to do it. Strong
alliance of male power and female isolation are protecting those rules from any
opposition. Woman has no social power to do anything for themselves except to
play by the rules and hope for the best. And man has full liberty to apply his
right what ever she does.
…I’m gonna live for ever; why not be arrogant?
Who ever can find the reason in some philosophy to beat who
ever if we start looking things in that way. That to me looks as a world full
of five-member-comities deciding on who will be beaten next. Our comity will
meet and decide that X should be beaten because he was, for instance, beating
his wife. Very legitimate reason to want someone punished and, most of all
redirected in his thinking, by the way. Next thing will be that the other
comity, consisted of the supporters of wife beating, who therefore consider
beating X was illegitimate hence punishable by their rules, will decide that
members of your comity, or the person who was by your order physically beating
the wife beater (X), should be beaten to
death and exposed on a public square. They again, and everyone who helped them
beat you, will be raped and murdered by ones who have grounds to condemn them… No.
I think that you have to stop giving yourself any right to enslave and torture
other people. And you have to stop defending your positions using self-definitions
that give you undeserved credits, with the excuse that someone once gave that
power to own selves and then attributed it to your appearance.
You don’t have a right to prevent your children from doing
what makes THEM happy and deny the right to the half of the population to
creative realization of their human potentials based on your, for ever self-promoting,
theories. Same as people who dare to govern have no right to discharge parts of
the society in line of sharing social options. And it is always ones who have
neither rights or means to oppose oppression that are being put on a waiting
list when it comes to corrections in order. In some places there is not even a
waiting list as the order is not considering any changes as necessary or
needed, but sees itself as final and natural share of power in which those who
have power are presenting it as a natural state of affairs and proving their
righteousness by calling themselves smarter then others.
…World is full with chosen ones; god is not very picky for
servants;
Now to go back to supernatural entity, which existence you
want to acquire a social consensus about, by assuming that we should all a
priori agree that god exists and other opinions have no real echo in your perception
of what religion should have a right to influence with in the life of the
individual.
You believe that you are smarter then others because that supernatural
entity chose to make you smarter then others, attaching to that presumed fact
of own god-given superior wisdom, as something that naturally follows, the
right to govern for the benefit of society. Yet you are projecting that
supernatural entity as approving to what ever misuse of power, gained by being
smarter then others, you might perform. What are you taking your god for? A
monster or a fool?
If I would be imagining supernatural power that would be
sharing justice after this life is done with, I would see it (the power, the
god) as it is making every person, after they die, experience for ever, what
ever they have made others experience while they were alive. All pleasure and
harm that you caused for someone you’ll be experiencing over and over for the
eternity. Let’s take a look on how that conception of god would make us behave.
If you raped someone, you’ll be for ever experiencing yourself a pain that you
caused to the one who you raped. That would be a picture of justice if this
life appeared to be a test. Why would someone who needs no violence, as their
power is beyond limits, favorite violence and prescribe rewords for it? Tell
me, why do you thing that kind of self-sufficient, everlasting, non-destructible
life form would want you guys to keep
him company for the rest of eternity and would have indefinite number of
virgins, or who knows what you expect, to reword your behavior during testing
period? Or you have read so little other fiction that you actually believe that
everlasting, all-knowing, omnipotent thing would have such earthly faults like
anger management problem or so. Imagine that perfect thing in its chambers,
alone in its uniqueness (yet surrounded with the souls of all who ever died
without the sin; other then Mother Theresa, Pope and few other high clerics, mostly
babies and small children), raging and shouting about someone being a gay, then
sending a lightening to kill that one. (Do babies in haven have a consciousness
as adults, or they are still reasoning like babies? And are they growing up
there in heaven? That would explain where all the virgins to be shared come from.)
…God definitely exists; as a mean of manipulation
I don’t really think that any of those judging and punishing
stories would apply to “god” if something like that existed. So, I have no fear
from what god will do with me, if I realize after I die, that I woke up in
another life. I have a fear of what you guys, who are presenting god as your ally,
can do to me in this life. And I say that, the very fact that you are still not
punished for your crimes against humanity is a proof that no all mighty and perfectly
fair life form exists. Or at least that supposed form has no interest of so
ever in interfering around here with its powers. Justice of such life form
would be justice, not your presentation of justice. Justice is obvious when
there is no chosen ones. If there is no god, who did you say chose you again?
It is a pity and really a shame that such kind of justice-sharing,
all-present creature does not exist. Paradox, but those suffering biggest loss
from the absence of such law enforcing force, are the ones who don’t believe in
its existence. We have to watch and fear from what someone can inject into your
mind trough the channel called cognitive dissonance that belief in god is
creating in your mind. Trough that channel every irrational fear can be transferred.
And for those fears people go to war. If he existed he would take care of you
guys.
Religion is basically a tool for producing sheep. And even
if that would be excusable, if you observed it as if we had different mental
potentials (again if you want purpose of hegemony), and in most cases you do
succeed to make sheep with the carrot and the stick; but occasionally, because
mental torture has sometimes such effect, instead of a sheep you create a
monster and then the guy comes to school to shoot some children. Which then
some priest describes as a christmas message from god that we should love each
others more. If path of success is just a most selfish possible response to the
given circumstances, then god is favoring clever psychopaths.
…God save me from your people!
The whole story of church being responsible for doing good
things
(like spreading culture* (*read their financing options) by investing
some of the extra revenue from the wholly wars and slave work to teach masses
to follow their command)…
Only bad things need a god’s name to be done in. Why would
someone do good and hide their name? Good things are done by people. In their
own names. Or you would have never heard the name of Mother Theresa and bunch
of others; if they didn’t act in their own name. They might be calling “god’s
name” frequently, but they are quite exposed along with their invisible boss.
People tend to not check properly one story before believing
in it. Young people still wearing Che on their chests. You should at least surf
some internet before identifying with someone’s statements and actions. Almost
every human does something good now and then in their life. But can that excuse
us for crimes that we do?
Some of the actions of some religious believers and members
of some churches might have done good for what we call “humanity” (which is
still excluding ones who are dieing this very moment from the medically preventable
deceases), but “church”, an organized religion, as institution of power, has
done so many evidently horrible things that measuring any good as a balance to
that would be as giving credits to Hitler for playing Wagner in the camps.
I’ve heard people saying about a man who was an evidential
maniac and proven (also war) criminal: …”All that, but he was a very fair
person (treating badly only the ones who deserved it, I guess), he was always
kind to neighbors (lucky for them) and he was a big believer (giving generous
contributions to the church from his plunders).”
What the hell does that mean? A big believer? Killed more
then one with own hands. In the name of building a compound on the hill. And
singing career for his mistress who he, in following, married, made her children,
drugged her, abused her, (not that she was a saint herself, but) used her as a
cover for his smuggling affairs and in few occasions as a human shield… She was
probably wondering why god chose her, amongst other girls from her village who
also sang equally well, to fulfill such a grate destiny of serving as a
punching bag for that grate god’s man… Finally some other maniac shot him in
the eye. She still roams the society… Disgusting story. Like a bad movie.
Paranoia is a natural result of the belief in god.
God will give you peace!; Of what?
How many of such stories have you heard with people who
express themselves to be non-believers as protagonists? I can’t recall any.
Maybe I have a selective memory, but not even movies have managed to create a
non-religious anti-hero (ideology counts the same as religion).
Non religious people are not members of any elitist organization
united around holding each others asses. And they would be first to recognize
god if god existed, and if god was doing what god would be supposed to be doing
(creating wealth and prospect for all), they would love him in deed. But with
the present situation in the world, if god exists (with all subscriptions,
abilities and belonging rights), he must be either busy or absent. 7 thousand
years vacation is all he needed. It was tedious creating the universe and all. .
But if he (or what ever… god…) exists, then I intensively
dislike that creature and disapprove its politics. His employment decisions are
equally inadequate for someone with his reputation.
Even if there is a creator, that person is just watching,
doing nothing. He made it all and now he is observing what his intelligent
design is capable for. It’s an ongoing experiment it seams. He is working on
improvements, mangling with our genes, trying to make us last for ever, but he
is failing all the time. That’s probably why he is making so many of us that we
have to fight for resources. (Or is it because he doesn’t allow contraception?)
If god doesn’t exist, we will all nicely die after we have
finished (if we are privileged) our life cycles, making space for new specimens
that we produced. Though attractive idea, changing dimension, shape of
existence and all, is as unlikely to reflect reality as the idea that our soul
entered our body, coming from somewhere, in conception.
We will all die, and how would it be if it would be possible
to not die? Some would live for ever and some would be fed in cages for a year
or two and then prepared on a barbecue.
…Love (god), have faith (in god) and, most importantly, hope
(that there is a god)
If there is a god, then the whole concept of life in its
formation is a crap and I hate being conscious to witness it. But even if some
of the conceptions about god (monotheistic, polytheistic, what ever...)
happened to be the truth, and I ended up being questioned, he can put me straight
to hell; but before I even think of answering to anything he, she, it has to
ask me, before even asking “who is asking?”, I would insist on one question:
Why all the suffering? Then we can pass on to “Did you love me enough?” and
stuff.
“I have never seen you before. Now you say that you’ve been
watching me all the time. YOU should have loved ME more.”
If you analyze carefully, the very possibility of the existence
of an entity with those characteristics and of such actions is an oxymoron, but
if god exists, that thing is a complete moron in its ways and attitudes. You
are insulting the very idea of god as a symbol of perfection. God would be
different than that.
…If god would exist, world would be a place of happy (yet
boring) life for all its creatures
But if god doesn’t exist, then we have to quit with
ridiculous, hurtful, discriminating practices that are creating tensions and
hostilities. Resources we spend to defend ‘ourselves’ from ‘others’ (those who
follow different cult &/or have less then us) we can redirect into
something useful. Something that will give some people a chance to live their
life as humans, just as we wish for ourselves, don’t we? We can replace all
meaningless hours of studying prayers and fictional scenarios with teaching
kids about birds and bees and other things useful for survival. If we educate
boys and girls, we don’t have to keep them away from each others or cover them
like peaces of furniture.
If there is no god, there is no one watching you in your
most intimate moments and your thoughts are yours and yours alone. If there is
no god people can stop thinking of god and maybe there’ll be less
schizophrenia. You are only one responsible: no one to judge you, but no one to
forgive you either.
If we don’t have presumed enemies in a shape of those who
have interest in a “wrong” sex or eat with the wrong hand, we have more time to
think about things that will make someone happy. If we don’t have to waste our
time debating on whose version is the right one, we can spend our time and
‘money’ to give everyone time of their life.
…Facing the fact that you have to vanish; it’s a sad, sad
fact, yet…
If there is no god, then world is so exciting. If we don’t
have to close ourselves into ideologies, long ago ran over by our understanding
of nature, instead of practicing same verses from the same book every day, we
can every day read something new which will deepen our perception and expand
our vision, so that we can become more useful for ourselves, people around us
and wider society. I mean, we will all die anyway; what ever we do to each
others. If we don’t have to fight about god we can be friends. We already don’t
exist in a future; why make it harder on each others while we do? We all exist
in a same relative space in a same relative time, witnessing same events of
what we call present. If there was a god, being self-conscious would be ‘a
curse and a blessing’. Knowing that we exist with the expiry date fills no one
with extreme satisfaction.
But if there is no god, that’s just how things are no matter
how we feel about it. So we can let the sorrow go and focus on our gift.
Our existence as a part of the universe and the incredible
chemistry of life feel so meaningless, yet so limitless. Knowing that all the
atoms in our body have once been particles of some star, which means that we
existed billions of years ago just not assembled together in this way… If there
is no god, then we are a star dust in an exalted state. Although we have to die
and disintegrate, isn’t it unusually liberating to realize that our life has no
meaning to anyone but ourselves and those whose life we make impact on, with
our actions, along the way?
Even if you believe deeply, even if you are elevated and
stimulated and motivated for incredible deeds by the thought that ‘he’ is
watching you, just imagine for one moment, if there is no god, what a wonderful
world this could be.
No comments:
Post a Comment