|
Why I would make a better god than
god...
...Fundamentalists often tout god as all great, all good and all everything...
But when pressed for details, the god they present usually turns out not
to be all that spectacular.
...Based on one of these debates, I made up a comparison of myself versus
this fundamentalist's version of god (and a few other fundies I've debated
over time)... now admittedly, this version of god may not be your version
of god, but sadly, it is many people's version of god, so I wanted to
look into it more.
...So here it is: Why I would make a better god than god
|
me |
god |
Would design the windpipe so people couldn't
choke while eating.
Clearly a weak design point... of many in the
human body alone.
See the FAQ on
'jury-rigged design' on talk-origins.org. |
 |
 |
Would make myself known to people.
i.e. show up occasionally. Leaving behind an
ancient book of stories just doesn't work for most ppl. And this whole
bit about having to love god and believe in him before he makes himself
apparent to you just doesn't work either (what? would Shiva be apparent
to me if I believed in him too?) |
 |
 |
Would not deny people heaven if they happened
to miss the signs I left.
God is often described as denying heaven even
to good people if they didn't believe. If I were god, there is nothing
a human could do during a finite lifespan that would cause them to
lose eternal happiness and reward. Even murder is meaningless when
talking about eternity. |
 |
 |
Would apologize for my mistakes and correct
them without mass murder.
God didn't like the mess on earth, so he killed
off just about everyone with a flood... if I were all powerful like
god, I would just fix it (and you mean everyone was
bad except Noah?) |
 |
 |
Wouldn't make people mean to prove a point.
During Exodus, god "hardened the Pharaoh's
heart". If I were god, maybe one display would be enuf then I
would soften his heart so he would let my people go... all that suffering
for the innocent people of Egypt was not necessary. Most of them likely
had never even seen a Jew, how could they be culpable... and killing
the first borns? was that necessary? |
 |
 |
Would never order mass genocide.
Repeatedly in the OT, god orders the Jews to
kill their enemies or to launch attacks against them. In one particularly
brutal display he orders them to kill every man, woman, and child,
except the young virgins, who the men were to keep for themselves.
(num 31) That kind of slaughter just isn't necessary for an all powerful
deity and I wouldn't order it. |
 |
 |
Would fix the 'sin' problem without making
an innocent suffer.
Jesus was innocent, why did god feel the
need to send him down here to 'atone for our sins' when god could
have snapped his fingers and made it so? Why did people have to
suffer for a simple fix? I would find a way to fix the 'sin problem'
without the death of an innocent.
|
 |
 |
If I had to send Jesus, would make
sure he didn't say silly things.
Cursing a fig tree for not having fruit out
of season, calling the mustard seed the smallest of seeds, saying
you have to hate your family... I would be sure to brief Jesus better
on things to do and say. |
 |
 |
Wouldn't need to rest after creation.
If I were all powerful, I don't think a rest
would be necessary (Genesis). |
 |
 |
Wouldn't leave an incredibly dangerous
fruit with two innocents.
Adam and Eve didn't know not to disobey (that
would require knowledge of good and bad, which they did not have). |
 |
 |
Would not curse a child for the problems
of their parents.
Making a child responsible for the 'sins' of
its parents seems silly, making all of us guilty for the 'sins' of
Adam and Eve is doubly so... If it were up to me, each child and person
would start from a level field, not buried up to their neck before
they even start. |
 |
 |
Would teach compassion for all.
Sure Jesus made up for some of it, but there
are still those abomination parts of the OT that cause problems to
this day (most of Leviticus). |
 |
 |
Would make sure that people copying and
translating my holy book didn't make mistakes.
A bit of apologetics often touted is that mistakes
and contradictions are due to 'copying errors' (which is funny, because
many fundies also claim the bible has never changed). If god could
have guided the initial authors, why not the one's who translated
it? I sure would. |
 |
 |
For that matter, I would make sure the
truths in my holy book really are apparent.
A real truth should be visible to all who look,
not just to a select few or to those who interpret it correctly. None
of this vague language that has to be interpreted by special people
or language that doesn't make sense until after the fact... Clear,
simple phrases with clear, simple meanings... And as time changed
and language evolved, I'd send a few revisions to keep things up-to-date
with the vernacular. And I'd made sure no one wrote anything as stupid
as 'no more revisions past this one' in my holy books (John) |
 |
 |
Would have a word or two with people who
claimed to speak for me, but who twisted my words.
Lots of people claim to be god's messengers,
but they make wild claims that surely can't be true (calls for mass
murder or to starve children just doesn't sound like god). When one
of these people comes out, they are quickly denounced by other theists.
Both groups can't be right... I would be sure to set the record strait. |
 |
 |
...Well, that's just a short list... But it makes the point for now.
|