Skip to main content

The Mystery of God

By WizenedSage --

Recently, in one of the forums, ColorMixer raised the question of how to deal with believers who fall back on the “Mystery of God” defense. That defense is being used when the believer says something like,
“That aspect of god is beyond our human reasoning, how can we expect to know the mind of god?” Or, he might say, “…well it seems illogical to us humans, but we are only humans, he is god.”

It seems to me that believers who use this defense are mocking their god without even realizing it. What they are suggesting is that god is too stupid to know that if he wants to convince us of something, to teach us something, then his message must make sense to us. Any third-rate sales person understands that to sell me something, he must speak my language and have a pitch that makes sense to me. He can’t just talk inane gibberish and expect me to accept his argument. Is god dumber than a third-rate sales person? One might ask the believer, “If god made us in his image, then shouldn’t his thinking processes make sense to us?”

There are a number of passages in the Bible which claim that god doesn’t like the wise, that people should be as credulous as children, that they should just believe without questioning. These passages are telling us we should be stupid when it comes to our religion. But who really wants us to be stupid? Is it god or the Bible authors and preachers?

If god wanted males without foreskins, why didn’t he make them that way in the first place? We cannot avoid the use of reason. Humans do not function on instinct alone. We think. Believers in the Bible accept it because, somehow, it makes sense to them. Perhaps the Gospels sound believable to them. Perhaps Paul’s claim that 500 people saw the risen Christ clinches it for them (ignoring that only one person said it). Somehow, they came to the conclusion that the god of the Bible is real and that the Christian message is true. Their reasoning may be completely wrong, but they have used reason to come to these conclusions. Perhaps they believe largely because they’ve been told this stuff over and over their whole lives and nearly everyone else they know also believes it. But they could not avoid reasoning about it on some level. Thus, if using reason is unavoidable, then it cannot be wrong to subject the Bible and Christian dogma to reason. It’s like eating; if eating is unavoidable if we are to live, then eating cannot be wrong in our eyes or in any reasonable god’s eyes.

Let me recapitulate a bit. We humans cannot help but reason about things. We do it all the time. If a god made us, then he surely understands this. He would have to be incredibly stupid not to realize that he needs to make sense to us in order to gain our belief, our worship. Since the story of the Christian god comes initially from the Bible, then the Bible must make sense to us or we must reject it. And therein lays a major problem.

A god who loves us so much he gave his only son, etc., is not consistent with a god who caused a flood to murder every person on the earth except for one family. Something has to be wrong with one story or the other – or both. (But those people were all “evil,” you say? Even the toddlers and babies? And did god never hear of retraining?) Is the flood story just metaphor? How would this change anything? The moral would still be, “Do as I say or I’ll kill you and all your children too.”

The Bible does not offer a coherent, consistent description of a god who loves humans, yet this is the bottom-line message of the Christian philosophy. Something is wrong, and it likely is the assumption that the Bible consists of revelation from a god.

Clearly, much of the “moral” teaching of the Bible makes no sense to people of today. One who tells me that it would somehow be a good thing for me to hate my family and my life (in order to follow him) has a very troubling sense of values, and I am not about to accept him as a legitimate voice for morality. Then there are the commands to kill homosexuals, blasphemers, disobedient sons, adulterers, etc. These should undermine anyone’s belief that the Bible is the revealed word of god. How could any of these be justified in any sensible, moral “plan?” If the words don’t sound like those of a god, but rather the words of ancient, ignorant, brutal men, perhaps it’s because that’s what they are. Isn’t that the simplest, most likely solution?

Because we cannot avoid using reason, then we will always harbor some suspicion that what we’re told god wants might not be totally accurate. If someone says god wants us to cut off the foreskins from our baby boys, shouldn’t we be suspicious? Could this be some human's idea, and not gods? If god wanted males without foreskins, why didn’t he make them that way in the first place? Don’t we have to use reason in puzzling through this? Should we really just obey what some man or book tells us is god’s will - even if it’s bizarre?

It’s only reasonable that a god should make sense to us before we accept him, and, at the end of the day, I can make no sense of a god who drowns children. Worshiping such a killer should be considered immoral. How could there possibly be a “plan we don’t understand” in such senseless brutality? The “Mystery of God” defense is just a red herring, a diversion. In a word, it’s nonsense - nonsense used to cover up more nonsense.


Popular posts from this blog

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo

On Living Virtuously

By Webmdave ~  A s a Christian, living virtuously meant living in a manner that pleased God. Pleasing god (or living virtuously) was explained as: Praying for forgiveness for sins  Accepting Christ as Savior  Frequently reading the Bible  Memorizing Bible verses Being baptized (subject to church rules)  Attending church services  Partaking of the Lord’s Supper  Tithing  Resisting temptations to lie, steal, smoke, drink, party, have lustful thoughts, have sex (outside of marriage) masturbate, etc.  Boldly sharing the Gospel of Salvation with unbelievers The list of virtuous values and expectations grew over time. Once the initial foundational values were safely under the belt, “more virtues'' were introduced. Newer introductions included (among others) harsh condemnation of “worldly” music, homosexuality and abortion Eventually the list of values grew ponderous, and these ideals were not just personal for us Christians. These virtues were used to condemn and disrespect fro

I can fix ignorance; I can't fix stupid!

By Bob O ~ I 'm an atheist and a 52-year veteran of public education. I need not tell anyone the problems associated with having to "duck" the "Which church do you belong to?" with my students and their parents. Once told by a parent that they would rather have a queer for their sons' teacher than an atheist! Spent HOURS going to the restroom right when prayers were performed: before assemblies, sports banquets, "Christmas Programs", awards assemblies, etc... Told everyone that I had a bladder problem. And "yes" it was a copout to many of you, but the old adage (yes, it's religious) accept what you can't change, change that which you can and accept the strength to know the difference! No need arguing that which you will never change. Enough of that. What I'd like to impart is my simple family chemistry. My wife is a Baptist - raised in a Baptist Orphanage (whole stories there) and is a believer. She did not know my religi