Jeff from the caveat lector thinks there are problems in my argument and he disagrees with my point. You can read his response to my original post here Jeff’s response.
Now you can go on and read the Jeff’s response and my responses on Jeff’s post, to it; but for the sake of you guys, I thought I’d share this with you too. I am just going to copy past a few lines from Jeff’s response which I believe are his main points, you can read the rest yourself. I believe Jeff made two points.
I have seen this year, some pretty strong reactions regarding “all hallows eve”. Some Christians and I only mean the ones I know or have seen, came up against it pretty aggressively. Their point being that it is a ritual which has its roots in occult and Satan worship and that we as Christians should not participate in “devil worship” and “glorifying Satan”.
Greg from Poeticalcynic asked this question, here is my take on it Greg.
Friedrich Nietzsche said:
“A god who is all-knowing and all-powerful and who does not even make sure his creatures understand his intention—could that be a god of goodness? Who allows countless doubts and dubieties to persist, for thousands of years, as though the salvation of mankind were unaffected by them, and who on the other hand holds out the prospect of frightful consequences if any mistake is made as to the nature of truth? . . . Did he perhaps lack intelligence to do so? Or the eloquence? Must he not then . . . be able to help and counsel [his creatures], except in the manner of a deaf man making all kinds of ambiguous signs when the most fearful danger is about to befall on his child or dog?”
Plenty of problems there:
1. “A god …who does not even make sure his creatures understand his intention”
I would question the validity of this statement, I would ask how is this alone tested and proved, Empiricism? That carries its own problems. What about his creatures who do understand?
2. “Could be a God of goodness”
That is a platonic view of God, God is not made up of goodness or badness. A more Thomistic approach would seriously challenge this notion. Anyway, its also wrong because it assumes God is good according to what we feel good. Can we not be wrong? How do we decide what is good? by vote?
What about people who do not have this complain against God? God doesn’t have goodness in him, he is goodness. Just like he doesn’t have lovely feelings for us, he is Love.
I’m not actually mad at God. I don’t believe in the fucker.
I am sure if you are a Christian and on the internet you might have read these words more than often. Words that might just piss you off or at least that is what the author originally had in mind. Most of the time what usually follows is that Christians often try to justify God in his actions. They sometimes give excellent rationale and at other times they say something dumber than dumb. Most Christians and I am talking about some hardcore Christians, might just turn back and give the same dosage of abusive language to the author. But in all of this, what Christians do not realize that at the moment they tried to justify God’s actions, they ended up in a trap.
Lets face it, you cannot defend God, convincingly. You can offer explanations and all that but the truth is no one is bound or obliged to believe how you think your God is good. To an atheist, a Muslim praising his God, a Buddhist praising Buddha and a Christian praising Jesus is all the same. Most atheists display a remarkable ignorance of faith and its inner working. And so very often if you are going to quote your bible, my bet is it is not going to work because to the atheist it is a “crap load of fabricated stories”.