Skip to main content

Evil: Why Nothing Makes Murder More Moral Than Religion

 Dennis Prager is a Right Wing Christian Nazi for God, who falsely claims, like most if not all Christians, that there can be no objective morality without God. He also argues that all atheist's agree with this proposition. In fact, both of these lies are simply two more giant lies that Christians rely on to spread their other lies. 

Fist off, there can ONLY be an objective morality WITHOUT GOD, for God always and everywhere is only an example of how there is NO OBJECTIVE MORALITY - since he kills anyone he wishes, as often as he wants, and commands his followers to do the same, all the time in fact. If there was an objective morality, then God would be bound by that morality as well.


In his book Euthyphro, Plato asked a simple question: if there is a real difference between “right” and “wrong,” then we must ask if that difference is “due to God’s fiat or is it not?”  If good and evil are absolutes, we must determine if they are absolutes because God created them, or because they exist wholly independent of God. And if they exist independent of God, then where did such standards come from in the first place, and more importantly, why should we not use such standards to judge even God?

If God created the standard, then God can only be as “good” as he is “evil,” because he would then exist and operate wholly outside of such a standard. Hence, the standard would only have meaning if God had deliberately created an existence in which such a standard could be applied.  Otherwise, we are suggesting that God is powerless to change the very standard he is said to have created. Such a God would not therefore be all powerful.

If the standard exists independent of God, however, then judging God by such a standard would only prove He was worse than Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and every serial killer throughout history that ever lived, combined. In fact, God would even be convicted of having both the "mens rea" (the "guilty mind") and the "actus rea" (the "physical act") of both  knowingly creating people that he knew would engage in murder, which is no different than creating a cyborg or a terminator, and sending it out on a mission to kill Sarah Conor. 

 In either case, an infinitely powerful God would, in theory at least, have the ability to create an infinitely better universe than the one we currently inhabit. God cannot be considered “good,” therefore, if every universe he creates is always only half as good as one he could have created. On the other hand, to suggest that God uses evil “to help advance his divine plan” is to suggest that God could not advance that “plan” without necessarily relying on evil. And that means that even "evil" is necessarily part of "God's plan." And thank God for evil! For If Jesus had been run over by a crosstown chariot or dropped dead from a heart attack, in other words, then humanity would never have been redeemed by all those who conspired to kill him.    




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Christianity is More Unnatural Than Homosexuality

I grew up in a family that is about as homophobic as Phil Robertson and the Westboro Baptists, only they're not quite as boisterous about it; at least not in public anyway. They have also conveniently convinced themselves  that their homophobia is really just their unique Christian ability to "hate the sin, but love the sinner" (even though these very same Christians adamantly refuse to accept that people can "hate Christianity, but love the Christian").  The sexual superiority complex necessarily relied on by such Christians is, of course, blanketed beneath the lambs wool of the Christian humility of serving "God." They interpret their fear of those who are different, in other words, as simply proof of their intimate knowledge and love of God. And the only thing such Christians are more sure about than that their own personal version of "God" exists, is that such a "God" would never want people to be homosexual - no matter how ma

Christianity: An Addiction of Violence Masquerading as Love: Part II

"But God by nature must love Himself supremely, above all else." Fr. Emmet Carter   This is part  two of a look at an article written about the "restorative and medicinal" properties of punishment, as espoused by Fr. Emmett Carter (https://catholicexchange.com/gods-punishment-is-just-restorative-and-medicinal/).  Ideas of this sort in Christianity go back to St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas - two saints who saw the suffering of Christ as sure fire evidence that God needed humans to suffer to balance the cosmic scales of his love for us. Sure, he could've come up with a better game, or made better humans, but its apparently the suffering he really enjoys seeing. Carter's essay raises countless questions, especially about the true nature of God's blood lust, but lets stick to just four simpler ones. The first question deals with the idea of "free will." According to Christians, God designed us with the ability to freely choose to obey or offend h

Christianity: An Addiction of Violence Masquerading as Love: Part I

If the Holy Bible proves anything at all, it proves that the Christian God has a blood-lust like no other God in history. From Abraham to Jesus to the end times to eternal hell, the Christian God loves suffering even more than, or at least as much as, said God loves Himself. And if everything from the genocides in the Old Testament and God killing everyone on the planet with a flood, to Jesus being tortured and murdered (rather than the devil, who is the guilty one) and the fiery end of the world followed by the never ending fires of hell, are not enough to convince you that Christianity is really an addiction to violence masquerading as "love," just consider the psychotic rantings of a Catholic priest trying to convince his faithful flock that murder and mutilation - which he calls "punishment" -  are proof of just how much his "God" is pure love.  In an article published on https://catholicexchange.com/gods-punishment-is-just-restorative-and-medicinal/,