The other day, I saw a MEME essentially implying 'People with God - Happy; People without God - Angry'.
I plan on addressing the theme of this argument in the near future, but before I do that, the first thing is - Who, or What exactly is God?
Human beings, as far as we can tell, have always believed in a creator, and during the course of conscious humanity defined god in various forms.....and the process continues to this day.
I remember the first challenge I became aware of to the Judeo-Christian concept of God; it came from a group of thugs in Brooklyn NY during the 1970's when I was a Junior in High School. This gang called themselves GODS, proclaiming all of them were the embodiment of God. Of course, as a Christian I 'knew' better, and, when I found myself in a fight with one them - with his entire posse watching. I made sure they understood that I was skeptical, by not showing them fear, and knocked my antagonist to ground, then glared down the rest of his group, outside of the McDonald's adjacent to our school. Surprisingly and thankfully, the GODS didn't respond (something all too common in future god explorations and inquiries), and I walked away without additional problems.
In retrospect, at times I wonder if their argument isn't possibly a better god premise, because it establishes a continuity of life, existence, time, and space into one package, and conceivably there may be many other god packages similar to ours. Of course, it wouldn't be just those who buy the concept, but everything we humans experience and can influence, in addition to possibly other life forms outside of the earth and our solar system. A fellow godless person once opined in a personal conversation, for him, the idea of one god is inconsistent with everything we know of, that either there are no gods, or there are a multitude of gods, a logic that makes sense, when we look at how the world and nature works - we know of nothing that exists in exclusivity.
The reason I showcased these concepts, is to demonstrate the futility, with our current technology, knowledge, and experience, to establish unquestionably if there is in fact a god, or if there is in fact no god. Most religions have books, and those books make numerous claims that cannot be dis-proven, but none establishes what is provably true, with regards to how we came to be.
No one can disprove I never saw a UFO, and your basis for believing if I did should be your confidence of how reliable a person I am, and nothing more. But, assuming you did, that by-itself doesn't make the story unquestionably true, and if you decided to be skeptical, isn't the onus on me to prove my claim true, versus me demanding you prove my story - untrue?
As a skeptic, I admit I have no way to prove the idea (nor do I truly believe that) of all life we know of, as comprising god, just as I cannot prove that my UFO story is true, or that aliens guided us, etc. Similarly, no believer can prove their particular perception of god, undoubtedly true. We have a culture, that claims the god of the bible, unquestionably true. This is a culture has dominated empires and continents for over 2000 years, and when there were early skeptics or challenges to the biblical god concept, the challengers and skeptics were summarily executed. The lesson learned over two millenniums is, do not question the biblical god concept - this, in my opinion, is the perfection of philosophical tyranny, and cannot be divine.
How true is any 'truth', if it cannot absolutely defeat the whims of challengers, no matter how ridiculous the claims may appear to be? All points of view should be considered, subjected to independent tests, additional challenges, until we can determine repeatable expectations, we have no business to claim any point of view exclusive from this discipline, true. Even established perceptions of truth should be evaluated again, if new information/technology is discovered offering a different explanation. If the only method to counter objections to existing perceptions of truth, is to employ brutality derived from popular power, or authority, or deception, then a better truth can never be, and human knowledge, growth, and experience is severely diminished.
The sun orbited the fixed-unmovable earth, the stars were pinholes in the firmament, the moon is an independent source of light, according to the bible, until each of these perception of truths were eventually challenged, and rendered undoubtedly untrue by measurable and repeatable evidence.
Therefore, if god is the reason believers are happy, and unbelievers unhappy, which god concept exactly, and how do you prove this god true? If the bible is your only source, I promise, I will bury my integrity, and enthusiastically use a comic book and Linkedin to prove Spiderman real; I see more virtue in Peter Parker, than I do in Yahweh - ;)
Hopefully, a quick thought provoking topic, and I post the following for some angry humor - explicit language, but please enjoy.
I plan on addressing the theme of this argument in the near future, but before I do that, the first thing is - Who, or What exactly is God?
Human beings, as far as we can tell, have always believed in a creator, and during the course of conscious humanity defined god in various forms.....and the process continues to this day.
I remember the first challenge I became aware of to the Judeo-Christian concept of God; it came from a group of thugs in Brooklyn NY during the 1970's when I was a Junior in High School. This gang called themselves GODS, proclaiming all of them were the embodiment of God. Of course, as a Christian I 'knew' better, and, when I found myself in a fight with one them - with his entire posse watching. I made sure they understood that I was skeptical, by not showing them fear, and knocked my antagonist to ground, then glared down the rest of his group, outside of the McDonald's adjacent to our school. Surprisingly and thankfully, the GODS didn't respond (something all too common in future god explorations and inquiries), and I walked away without additional problems.
In retrospect, at times I wonder if their argument isn't possibly a better god premise, because it establishes a continuity of life, existence, time, and space into one package, and conceivably there may be many other god packages similar to ours. Of course, it wouldn't be just those who buy the concept, but everything we humans experience and can influence, in addition to possibly other life forms outside of the earth and our solar system. A fellow godless person once opined in a personal conversation, for him, the idea of one god is inconsistent with everything we know of, that either there are no gods, or there are a multitude of gods, a logic that makes sense, when we look at how the world and nature works - we know of nothing that exists in exclusivity.
The reason I showcased these concepts, is to demonstrate the futility, with our current technology, knowledge, and experience, to establish unquestionably if there is in fact a god, or if there is in fact no god. Most religions have books, and those books make numerous claims that cannot be dis-proven, but none establishes what is provably true, with regards to how we came to be.
No one can disprove I never saw a UFO, and your basis for believing if I did should be your confidence of how reliable a person I am, and nothing more. But, assuming you did, that by-itself doesn't make the story unquestionably true, and if you decided to be skeptical, isn't the onus on me to prove my claim true, versus me demanding you prove my story - untrue?
As a skeptic, I admit I have no way to prove the idea (nor do I truly believe that) of all life we know of, as comprising god, just as I cannot prove that my UFO story is true, or that aliens guided us, etc. Similarly, no believer can prove their particular perception of god, undoubtedly true. We have a culture, that claims the god of the bible, unquestionably true. This is a culture has dominated empires and continents for over 2000 years, and when there were early skeptics or challenges to the biblical god concept, the challengers and skeptics were summarily executed. The lesson learned over two millenniums is, do not question the biblical god concept - this, in my opinion, is the perfection of philosophical tyranny, and cannot be divine.
How true is any 'truth', if it cannot absolutely defeat the whims of challengers, no matter how ridiculous the claims may appear to be? All points of view should be considered, subjected to independent tests, additional challenges, until we can determine repeatable expectations, we have no business to claim any point of view exclusive from this discipline, true. Even established perceptions of truth should be evaluated again, if new information/technology is discovered offering a different explanation. If the only method to counter objections to existing perceptions of truth, is to employ brutality derived from popular power, or authority, or deception, then a better truth can never be, and human knowledge, growth, and experience is severely diminished.
The sun orbited the fixed-unmovable earth, the stars were pinholes in the firmament, the moon is an independent source of light, according to the bible, until each of these perception of truths were eventually challenged, and rendered undoubtedly untrue by measurable and repeatable evidence.
Therefore, if god is the reason believers are happy, and unbelievers unhappy, which god concept exactly, and how do you prove this god true? If the bible is your only source, I promise, I will bury my integrity, and enthusiastically use a comic book and Linkedin to prove Spiderman real; I see more virtue in Peter Parker, than I do in Yahweh - ;)
Hopefully, a quick thought provoking topic, and I post the following for some angry humor - explicit language, but please enjoy.
Comments
Post a Comment