Skip to main content

The Problem of Evil and the Holocaust of the Children

By glebealyth ~

The Holocaust of the Children

You may remember, or have heard of, a study correlating societal health with the degree of religiosity in many nations. That study was carried out and written by Gregory S Paul. Mr Paul has also written a paper with the above (abridged) title, which is available here: LINK.

It is a 24-page article in an academic journal, so I have attempted to write a quick précis of it here for your enjoyment. Please, do not stop at reading this bastardised, cut-down and inadequate summary, but click on the links read the whole article and, I beg you, be gentle in your criticisms of my literary inadequacies.

In his paper, Paul begins by talking about the standard approach to suffering in the presence of a benevolent god, known as theodicy. Typically this talks about moral evil and suffering caused and suffered by adults. Although newsworthy disasters such as tsunamis, missing aircraft and hurricanes hold the public attention for a short while, the philosophers and theologians rarely allude to them in their theses, leaving this to the more amateur and populist rabble-rousers who seek to make mileage out of invoking them as examples of the wrath of their deity, born out of its anger yet demonstrating its eventual love. As the latter such analyses are often followed by announcements to the effect that Paypal users may now easily contribute to the financial well being of the speaker, we may dismiss them or at least ignore them as serious attempts to wrestle with the problem of theodicy.

Using figures arrived at by Carl Haub (,Paul takes a statistical look at the extent of the suffering and death experienced byimmature humans (children and aborted conceptions) throughout history and ponders the religious consequences of some uncomfortable facts.

A cumulative human population,thus far, of 100 billion has resulted in at least 50 billion deaths, from congenital or environmental causes, of juveniles who have failed to reach the "age of reason",at which they are thought capable of being responsible for their actions, changing their natures or responding positively to the salvational or redemptive offers of the particular religion to which they are exposed - these being the responses which, differing by religion, constitute the qualification for entry into the blissful, paradisiacal state of Eternity with their deity,otherwise known as mature consent. Add to these, the number of conceptions which fail to reach full term, which are estimated to total between 500 billion and 750 billion through human history, and it begins to become clear that, by whatever standards used, the perfect environment was not provided by this deity for the results of its intelligently-designed human reproductive system to thrive and enjoy, and the opportunities for entry into Eternity on the basis of choice were not maximised. (Ask any woman for about the perfection of the human reproductive system, the limits it alone places on the concept of "Free will" and also read the original article by Paul.)

This situation is bad enough to dismiss entirely the concept of a benevolent deity. If, however, critical and analytical thinking is allowed to proceed, the question must be asked, "What of the (putative) souls of all of these curtailed lives?" We must ask this question because government policies around the world are being influenced by people who believe that a soul is created at the moment of the union of a sperm and an egg, that the rights of the human being implied by that soul are equivalent to the rights of those who have already made the one-way journey out of the birth canal and survived, and that their opinions in this matter are backed by the ineffable yet infinite love of their deity for the children who may or may not eventually encapsulate or incorporate those souls for a period.

Traditionally, when a child reached the age of reason, it was capable of deciding whether to work towards spending eternity with the deity. Prior to this age,death would result either in immediate admittance to Paradise or time spent in Limbo. Recently, the concept of Limbo has basically been rescinded and, so as not to lose the support of otherwise inconsolable grieving mothers, and it has been decided that children who die before reaching this magical age of mature consent benefit from immediate promotion. However, suffering, construed as that inflicted upon and by adult humans, has been claimed to be that which strengthens and matures the soul, creating the sort of individuals who are fit for entry into Paradise and worthy enough of the honour, even if that worthiness has been inherited via an instance of substitutionary atonement.Without the maturational effects of suffering, the christian apologist, philosophers and theologians tell us, we would remain is the unenlightened state of children and little more than easily swattable, slightly erratic robots. Yet, this is exactly the state in which those who die from disease, hunger, and preventable illness remain when they die as juveniles.

On the subject of preventable illnesses, Paul makes the point that the situation he is describing in respect of the rates of pre-juvenile mortality has exactly the same degree of prevalence, irrespective of the religious environment, indicating that no deity whatsoever has been demonstrated to be capable of delivering any alleviation of this condition. However, he does point out that there does appear to be a correlation between increased pre-juvenile mortality and increased levels of christian religiosity.

If these same thinkers are correct, it would appear that the deity has not only failed to created for its favoured species either bodies or environment to manifest its glorious creative powers, it has also created a Paradise whose population is drawn, in the main, from a pool of immature, automaton-like creatures,most of whom never filled their yet-to-be-formed lungs with oxygen!

That which Paul has accurately termed "The Holocaust of the Children" as the result of suffering should, one would expect, prompt vigorous defences from the theologian, philosophical and apologetic encampments of christians. One's expectations would be unfounded, and those which I have seen have entirely avoided the issue and tried to discredit Paul's article by questioning the numbers and the basis upon which they are arrived at. Paul implies, and I heartily agree, that even of the numbers were all reduced substantially, it would make no difference to the argument.

Simply, the evidence and the arguments Paul puts forward point very strongly to the conclusions that evil exists; evil, if deities exist, was created by the deities, according to the religious, though reluctantly; deities are inactive or uncaring about evil(suggestive of non-existence) and deities are NOT benevolent.

Thank you for reading and, for the third time, please read the full article.


Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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


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

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not