Wednesday, March 12, 2008

In the discussion of agnosticism and atheism, it is interesting to think about the compatibility of religion and the presence of evil in the world. Most apparently, in my knowledge, for example is Christianity. With the ideal of an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-merciful God how then can evil and sins be explained beyond human nature and balance? For all religion, let alone humanity, in order for us to distinguish good from evil we must have both; but this balance could be argued as created by god or cultures of the world. I really liked the point in class of the powers of god limited from possessing both qualities, to simply omnipotent. It could be argued the same moral sophistication, if not more, would apply to deities as humans, but the same behavior at a more powerful level would also apply. This reflects a slight resemblance of Greek and Roman mythology in explaining the behavior of gods, to me.

That line of thought relates to the other point of religion, more specifically god(s) being a tool created by mankind, much like a saw, or the class example of an ax. We use this tool or ideal, to instill into people that one should follow and live by good because of the nature of evil and also, by the way, because this god said so through no verifiable and specific evidence. Then, if humans did not exist, would god? Naturalistically speaking, god would not exist, as the heavens may not exist now, other than in our own imagination. So then and there it may be a real thing in terms that we all make our own "heaven" and "hell" within ourselves and actions based on the morals of cultural upbringing and acceptance truly guide our beings and the idea of a god makes it easier or more important to follow.

1 comment:

Specific Relativity said...

If god does not exist without humans, would it be fair to say that god is not 'real', in the sense that he exists objective of us, and what we normally prescribe as god is, instead, imagination?

As for god's omnipotence, the argument that sticks with me (discussed only recently in a skepticism class) is "Can God create a stone so big he couldn't lift it?" If he can create such a stone, then he is obviously not all-powerful, being unable to lift it. If he cannot create such a stone, then he is still not omnipotent.

And I think that argument against one of the 'omni's is more difficult than others to break down.

Well there's a patchwork of responses, I suppose. I agree with your other points, specifically the notions of heaven and hell being internal and likely more useful as metaphors than real places.