Here are all of the final reasons we will be exploring in this post:
Reason 27: Religious people are often hypocrites (Polled 31 votes)
Reason 28: The religion was sexist (Polled 22 votes)
Reason 29: The religion was homophobic (Polled 21 votes)
Reason 30: The religion was bigoted (Polled 20 votes)
Reason 31: The religion called bad things good (Polled 17 votes)
Reason 32: God is evil (Polled 13 votes)
Reason 33: The religion called good people bad (Polled 12 votes)
Reason 34: Religious people are often terrible people (Polled 11 votes)
Reason 35: The religion called bad people good (Polled 10 votes)
Reason 36: The religion was ostracising (Polled 10 votes)
Reason 37: The claim that God killed loads of people (Polled 8 votes)
Reason 38: The claim that God killed children (Polled 5 votes)
Reason 39: I was hurt by religion or someone in it (Polled 5 votes)
Reason 40: The religion was racist (Polled 5 votes)
Reason 41: The religion called good things bad (Polled 5 votes)
Reason 42: The existence of evil (Polled 3 votes)
Reason 43: Bad things happening to good people (Polled 3 votes)
Reason 44: Good things happening to bad people (Polled 2 votes)
Reason 45: I asked for healing and was not given it (Polled 1 vote)
The below reasons were not voted for but I have heard them before:
Reason 46: I asked for money and was not given any (Polled 0 votes)
Reason 47: I asked for a miracle and was not given one (Polled 0 votes)
Reason 48: God did nothing but take my money (Polled 0 votes)
Reason 49: I suffered a tragedy (Poll 0 votes)
Reason 50: Nature is terrifying (Polled 0 votes)
In this post, I will be describing the interpretation of the Holy Bible’s overarching narrative that I find worth hoping for.
In the beginning, a being with reality-bending power, God, brought order to a chaos ridden creation. In God’s creative works He made a world full of life and untapped potential. God created a special creature, humans, to bring out the potential of this world by serving and loving it, one another, and God Himself. God would in turn bring out humanity's potential by serving and loving them.
Humans were of God’s likeness, though certain limitations made them incapable of being God themselves. Imperfect foresight, limited knowledge, and other limitations, though necessary for independent existence, made humans inept in their ability to distinguish good and bad in every situation. So one of the ways God would serve humanity would be through helping them know good from bad, not through static laws which are insufficient when good and bad can contextually fluctuate, but instead through a dynamic relationship with Him that can account for each unique situation.
God knew that creating humanity in the way He desired humanity to be, would lead to a human rebellion that would foster a cycle of choices resulting from and resulting in suffering and death that would ultimately consume and destroy humanity. Therefore God also had a plan for how he would respond to the human rebellion.
So, with the power to heal any wound physical or mental, the power to reverse environmental damage, and even power over death, when humanity would come to rebel against God, rejecting His role in their relationship in favor of their system of laws, God would let them. Thus, either symbolically or literally, what God had called bad (the eating of the fruit) the humans would call good, and what God had called good (the nakedness of the humans) the humans would call bad. The humans would go on to do this more and more until the first life was claimed with many more to follow.
Meanwhile, nature began to respond to the new circumstances brought about by the human rebellion. Other lifeforms would go on to evolve some pretty terrible things to combat terrible circumstances, fight fire with fire to survive.
Humanity suffered at the hand of their laws until there was only one family that desired a relationship with God; recognizing the suffering and death of their world as the product of the human rebellion. It is through this family that God would redeem humanity and bring out its potential.
Naturally, there was the threat of the other rebels either killing or corrupting this family. God knew every possible future of every man, woman, and child; He knew every one of them would choose rebellion and the death it would naturally lead to (such knowledge would be unique to God). Therefore, to defend the family which had chosen a path that could lead to life, God granted the rest of humanity the death they had chosen, at least for the time being.
This would not be the last time God would temporarily kill people. Many instances of God killing are hard to justify, especially with the limited knowledge I have as a human who is looking back through the lenses of records written by other humans of limited knowledge.
As someone who does not consider the Bible to be immune to flaws, human agendas, corruption, misinterpretation, and such. I am left to wonder to what extent God’s killings might be His own verses killings that corrupt leaders wrongfully justified in God’s name.
So given these four possibilities:
1) God might have chosen to kill for good reasons that I just don’t know due to limited knowledge.
2) Some of the killings might not have been condoned by God despite being attributed to Him by potentially corrupt humans looking to justify their murders.
3) Humanity's choices make death inevitable, and God intends to ultimately resurrect humanity, hence the deaths are only temporary.
4) If God knows every possible future a person might have then, for Him, someone like Hitler would be the same person as a child or as an adult. So, in the eyes of some, God killing children is no different than God killing an adult. If someone was able to travel back in time to kill Hitler as a child, knowing that killing him is the only way to stop him from causing the suffering he did, would you consider them evil for doing so? Can you consider God evil for possibly having done something similar?
You may now be wondering why God might not have killed Hitler. It would seem that God may have no intention to undermine the consequences of the human rebellion, the exception being in situations where humanity would otherwise snuff out any chance of redemption or other similar cases. Otherwise, He would have never equipped humanity with the freedom to choose in the first place. God does not intervene just to stop suffering or death (we are all going to suffer and die eventually anyway), those are matters He supposedly intends to address after they have reached their conclusion, possibly so that there is no doubt left in the minds of humanity as to where rebellion leads.
So I cannot label this understanding of God as definitely evil given the possibilities.
Whereas if a human were to kill in similar ways, I could see a case being made for them being labeled evil considering their ineptitude in knowing the nuances of a situation and in knowing the redeemability of a person.
Whether this hypothetical God deserves the label of evil or not is up to you. You can disagree with me and be valid in doing so, this is a subjective matter with no right or wrong opinion.
Anyway, as He might have done in the beginning, God would supernaturally enable this family to repopulate the world, be it by adding genetic diversity to their offspring where there might have otherwise been a lack through inbreeding, or by creating more people (later in the story of Jesus, God would create matter to multiply bread and fish, so it is not like He stopped creating things after the seventh day of rest). Though this family desired God's guidance, they were still heavily influenced by the world of rebellion from which they came, they desired a relationship with God other than the one He desired to have with them. Namely, they desired a relationship of lawgiver and law abiders.
God did not want to force these humans to change; dismissing their corrupt ideas of good and bad, and replacing them with the relationship He desired. Not only would it undermine the nature of humanity to have a choice, but it would also likely only set them up to rebel once again, having learned nothing. So God began the long process of bettering the ethics of humanity by recognizing the bits of good in human ethics and pointing humanity towards something incrementally better, even if not fully good.
One of the primary issues with humanity was selfishness. So rather than do all of the work of redeeming humanity Himself, God selected a particular group of humanity to better until they were at a point where they would selflessly go out to the rest of humanity, as God's representatives, and offer them the chance to surrender, repent from rebellion, and be made better through God’s work bringing out their potential.
Furthermore, throughout this process, God would permit humanity to define the form that God’s relationship with them would take. God would permit this to ensure His work in slowly bettering Humanity would continue. So, while God would rather have personal relationships with each of His people, His people elected to have laws work as an intermediary medium through which they would indirectly interact with God. God permitted this. Later the people would elect to be ruled through a human king as opposed to being ruled by God directly. God permitted this as well.
While God was able to slowly better his selected group of humans with these arrangements, there came a point where this system grew ineffective. God’s people began to mold their relationship with God into a set of contractual laws and agreements. Furthermore, they began to be unable to distinguish the sort of relationship God desired to have with them from the sort of relationship they wanted to have with God. So they came to believe God was an authoritarian dictator of sorts, and the day was coming when He would gather up all of those who lived according to every one of His ridged laws and destroy everyone else through divine military conquest.
God anticipated the rise of this warped and twisted understanding. So, from early on, God foreshadowed the arrival of a redeemer, the one who would define the true sort of relationship God desires to have with humanity and the sort of relationship God desires humanity to have with one another; a human who would not fall into rebellion as every other human does.
The story of the redeemer bears striking similarities to that of a man named Guy Gabaldon, and I find it helpful to tell the stories in parallel to get a better understanding of Jesus’s mission.
It was the tail end of World War Two and the allies were invading a small island off the coast of Japan known as the island of Saipan. The airstrips of this island would ultimately, albeit controversially, be used to bring an end to the war.
For weeks, brutal fighting claimed many lives until it was clear that the allies were going to take the island. Many of the Japanese soldiers and civilians rejected the notion of surrender, and many of the allied forces rejected the notion of giving the offer. This was the result of misinformation spreading amongst both sides which painted the enemy as either ruthlessly psychotic or pest like.
However, there was one man among the allied forces who knew better and desired mercy for the Japanese, a US marine named Guy Gabaldon.
Guy Gabaldon was a Hispanic American who, at a young age, was taken in and raised by a Japanese American family. As a result, he knew the humanity of the Japanese and could also speak Japanese like a native. He wanted the Japanese to have the opportunity of merciful surrender, and he was not afraid to risk his life to give them that opportunity.
So Guy Gabaldon, at first against orders and later following orders, would set out at night, working his way into Japanese soldier and civilian camps to provide the opportunity of surrender.
Doing this he convinced thousands of soldiers and civilians to surrender. By convincing the Japanese to surrender Guy Gabaldon saved their lives from the day of the final battle. The final battle would see all those who did not surrender wiped out in a suicidal charge against the allies.
It took a man with a desire to show mercy, to risk his life for his enemies.
It took a man not immediately recognizable as an American to avoid getting shot on sight due to misinformation about who he was and what his intentions were.
It took an American uniform to convince the Japanese that he was an American despite not being what they expected an American to be like.
It took an American to correct the misinformation about the Americans seeding the hope of life into those Japanese who accepted him.
It took the support of American command to foster confidence in the truth of Guy Gabaldon’s message.
For countless years humanity rebelled against God. Brutal fighting and wickedness claimed many lives. Much of humanity rejected the notion of surrender to God, and many of God’s chosen people rejected the notion of giving the offer. This was the result of misinformation spreading amongst both sides which painted the enemy as either ruthlessly psychotic or pest like.
However, there was one man among God’s people who knew better and desired mercy for the rebels, a man named Jesus.
Jesus was a Jewish man born to humble circumstances among those of low social status and the rebels. As a result, He knew the humanity of the poor, downtrodden, and rebellious. He wanted the rebels to have the opportunity of merciful surrender, and He was not afraid to risk His life to give them that opportunity.
So Jesus, against the approval of the religious elders, but in the approval of God the Father, would set out among the poor, downtrodden, and rebellious to provide the opportunity of surrender.
Doing this, He convinced many to surrender and equipped them to go out among the other rebels and do as He had done for them. By convincing the rebellious to surrender He saved their lives from the day of the final battle. The final battle will see all those who do not surrender, and those who cling stubbornly to their flawed ideas of what they think God should be like (rejecting God for what He truly is like), wiped out in a suicidal charge against God.
Unlike the story of Guy Gabaldon, the religious leaders who misrepresented God, had God’s true representative killed. However, as a final condemnation of the religious elders and condonation of Jesus, God rendered the religious leaders powerless by undoing the power of death they brandished, raising Jesus from the dead.
It took a man with a desire to show mercy, to risk His life for His enemies.
It took a man not immediately recognizable as God’s messiah to avoid getting rejected on sight due to misinformation about who He was and what His intentions were.
It took several miraculous acts to convince people that Jesus was God despite not being like what they expected God to be like.
It took a man who was also God to correct the misinformation about God, seeding the hope of life into those rebels who surrendered to Him and accepted Him.
It took the support of God the Father through the resurrection of Jesus, in the face of the religious leader’s having Jesus killed, to foster confidence in the truth of Jesus’s message.
The day of the final battle has yet to come. Once it concludes the earth will be barren of all human life.
Then, God will make the earth new; not a single scar from the human rebellion will remain. God will raise to life all of humanity. He will separate those who choose to remain in rebellion from those who choose to surrender and place each group in separate places.
Those in rebellion will bring about a world of far greater suffering than ever before. Though this world will not touch the world of those who surrendered.
Those who surrendered will bring forth the potential of creation and worship God through exploration, inventions, and the ways they use their authority to service creation.
Scientific research will no longer be hindered by corporate greed nor will it come at the cost of the environment. It will flourish and bring life in ways we could never imagine now.
Humanity will explore the stars and go on discovering the limitless wonders of God's creation for eternity.
So in the meantime, a portion of humanity has been tasked to be like Jesus, going out to all of the rebels as representatives of God, offering the opportunity to surrender to God and repent of rebellion; spreading the good news of God’s mercy for the rebellious and His plan to overcome the powers of death after it has consumed the world.
Another part of Jesus’s mission was to demonstrate the insufficiencies of the system of the law; such as when He healed on the Saboth. Then, once the insufficiencies of the law system were evident, He took action to fulfill, disrupt and dismantle the systems of the law. Then He extended the invitation for humanity to come back into the sort of relationship God has desired to have with us since the beginning; a relationship without the law and the governing intermediaries.
Thus a new age of ethics was ushered in. An age of ethics where we are no longer under the laws of the old testament. So instead of looking to the rulings of the old testament or making new laws from the teachings of the apostles, we are to pray and use the tools God has given us such as conscience, the input of others, and, most importantly, scientific discovery, to make loving moral judgments for each unique situation.
Put more specifically, we are not meant to look to the laws when making moral judgments about how we handle matters of sexuality, gender identification, gender roles, or racial relations. We are meant to examine how our moral choices affect each unique relationship and make the best choices we can, using all of the relational and scientific information we have available.
As for those who surrender to God. It seems evident that those who surrender to God are not immune to suffering. After all, sometimes it takes getting hurt by someone to be made aware of their need to be helped, either by you or someone more qualified than you that you can point them to. Sometimes a rebel will not listen to anyone who has not suffered in the ways they have. So God’s people suffer.
This also goes the other way. Sometimes a rebel will not listen to anyone who has not prospered as they have. So some of God’s people prosper. Or sometimes God’s people need funding to take the good news to others. So some of God’s people prosper so they can fund the others.
Finally, those who surrender do not become perfect. It takes time for a person to become aware of and then shed off their destructive tendencies. Many remain secretly rebellious and cause suffering. So it is possible for God’s people, or people claiming to be God’s people, to contribute to the suffering of the world. To make judgments about the hypothetical God through the actions of such people is to be unfair towards the possible God in my opinion. Though this is yet another subjective matter and you can validly disagree upon.
As for why good things can happen to those who are rebellious. We are all rebellious to varying degrees, even those who have surrendered still tend to rebel while they work to shed off their rebellious tendencies. Regardless, all good things of material nature are temporary, and those who have it will suffer the loss of it.
Within the above context, I cannot personally label this hypothetical understanding of God as evil. However, I can recognize the validity in a differing opinion. If God exists and is evil, there is no hope to be found in hoping for His existence. So if you cannot find an understanding of God that is not evil in your opinion, I think you are fully justified in choosing atheism.
Furthermore, I recognize that there are many truly insufferable and even evil Christians out there; Christians who try to use God to justify things like racism, sexism, and violence or who try to use religion to glorify horrible people. I can understand how easily a good person can be misrepresented by their fans, or people posing as fans bent towards evil.
Furthermore, within the context above, if there is a God, it would seem He is not one to force someone into compliance in most cases; perhaps He did in some special cases in the past, maybe he still does in some special cases. So I can understand that change takes time, and hurt people take time to heal. In the meantime, they may do bad or evil things. Though, I still cannot blame God for their behavior.
However, I can recognize the validity in a differing opinion. If you cannot bring yourself to hope for a God whose people are of the like you would never want to associate with, I understand why you would validly choose atheism or agnosticism. Especially if you believe a person's followers are always a good reflection of the person themselves.
Back to the beginning: Introduction
Previous Post: The holey book
Questions for my readers:
What are your thoughts about my summary of the overarching narrative of the Bible?
What are your thoughts about my take on the claims of God's killings?
What are your thoughts about my explanation for why those who surrender, or those who just claim to surrender, might still do bad, even horrible things?
What are your thoughts about my explanation for why those who surrender, or those who just claim to surrender, might either suffer greatly or live in prosperity?
What are your thoughts about judging a God based on their followers?
No comments:
Post a Comment