Monotheism
I just watched one of those Sunday-morning religious programs on TV, and they felt the need to have a Muslim, Christian, and a secular philosopher on the 'panel'. (it wasn't a really rigorous thing, but a daytime-tv-style chat on a sofa).
However, The secular philosopher just wiped the floor with the other two.
They were discussing why natural disasters happen - recently we have had the tsunami, Pakistani earthquake, The hurricane in New Orleans and so on.
The Muslim had a very deterministic view. She said that God had done these things to us, and it was 'written' (she didn't say where). She didn't offer any explanation as to why God did these things, and indicated that she had never really thought about it. I was left wondering how humane such a God would be.... Is that a God that *should* be worshiped? - To my mind any other such thing, like say, a disease, would be actively combated by humanity. In that case, why not extend the argument and actively combat God? (so far as this is possible of course -but for example, are vaccination, or evacuation acts against God's will in that view? Do we combat God when we warn against Tsunami? If we worship that God, then should we do that, or allow God to enact his will freely?).
The Christian had a different take on it. She said that God did these things for the good of Humanity, that she herself was brought closer to other humans by hearing about these things.
Great! 120,000 people die horribly so that a few relatively rich people can feel closer to Humanity and maybe donate something wholly inadequate to charity??
Why would God attack the poorest people all the time in order to stimulate the rest of us to be more pious?
Assuming God really intends this, then are we again thwarting God's will by trying to prevent these things?
With Christianity, it is all about free-will, supposedly. But what freedom of will does a victim in a natural disaster use to put themselves in that situation. What freedom of will do their governments use? (sure sometimes they have an amount of control, could take steps to avoid these things, but equally, sometimes the governments don't have a realistic chance or the resources to do something).
On an individual level, if I am hit by a bus tomorrow, and spend the rest of my life crippled, I might argue that God had some design for me. It could be some test. I could discover religion that way - indeed this clearly does happen to some people. Doesn't this conflict with our free will? - How are we exercising free-will when God has directly intervened to test us?
If at your school, your exams had involved the serious suffering and death of some of your fellow students, wouldn't you complain about it? - Maybe to the school-board? ;-)
Why not complain when God sets identical tests? (complain about God that is, as you would complain about any examining authority that did the same).
What about childhood illness? - How is a child tested/helped/punished/whatever, by being born sick?
If the test applies to the parents, is this the behaviour of a humane God?
Are the doctors challenging God's will by treating such a child?
The secular philosopher argued (quite unnecessarily in my view) that these tests of humanity arise out of natural processes, are essentially undirected in their effects, and are something Humanity really should deal with, without blaming or thanking an invisible intelligence over.
Current Mood: determined 
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
anthonyberet's journal
crushed