Friday, July 30, 2010

why doesn't God heal stupidity?

Photobucket
suffering




About three years ago I wrote a post, so long ago I was in my old family home. The post was about he website "why does God hate amputees" and I called it "why does God hate stupidity?" I staled it that not because I think having doubt is stupid, not because I think the problem of pain is not a very serious and very important question that should make us all think but becasue I find this guys approach insulting and obnoxious. Every so often some of his fans still respond to that post and say things about how brilliant he is and how stupid and evil I am for not seeing that is so great. This morning I got a comment form someone who I thin is sincere so I decided to answer it here in the major section.

This post came under the heading of "Anonymous" but it's not by the regular nemesis who posts by that name. Even though I have a rule against publishing comments by anyone using that name, I will make an exception because the poster probably did not know. but I ask him, I would like to hear from him, but please use another name. Even a number will do, but "Anonymous 1" is taken.






It is probably pointless for me to post this, but stupidity calls. I haven't read the site myself, so let me just say that first. But I get the gist of it as it was pointed out to me by a friend. I admit the reasoning is flawed, and it's a classic case of good observation leading to a bad conclusion.



Well no, not really. It's really a matter of the guy is totally insulting, filled with ridicule and refuses to think deeply about any of it because he assume Christians are stupid as shit and he doesn't have to think deeply, all he has to do is make fun.



But in that site, I don't see stupidity, I see pain.



You said you had not looked at the sight. So do you know? I have pain. I have loads of pain. I have so much pain in my life my favorite song is called "Pack your Sorrows" by Richard Farina (Author of the novel Been Down so Long it looks like Up To Me, think about it). The song says:

If somehow could pack up your sorrows
and give them all to me,
you would lose them,
I know how to use them,
give them all to me.

In other words, I know what it is suffer. But, that does not mean that mocking and ridiculing the attempt to have faith in the face of adversity is in anyway intelligent. It is not intelligent, is nothing more than cruel and selfish. If suffering people need God to get them through, who are you take that away from them and crush their hope with cruel mocking?

One of that guy's major attempts at dismissing faith is this, he say "close you eyes real tight and wish real hard for a candy bar or a Milk shake, did you get it? No, why, because there is no God there to give you a milk shake." No that's my paraphrase but he does say exactly that. Now do you really think that is a fair way to look at the problem of pain? God wont give you a candy bar on demand, so there is no God. Now is that really your idea of fair? Do you really think that's an intelligent way to think about the issues? If i said "Ok let's get a magnifying glass now look at your class of water, do you see any bugs? no? that's because science is crap, there are no germs." Would that really be a fair way to think about science?


I am a Jesus person facing the same exact questions as this guy (from what I understand from a cursory knowledge of the site) and if I am to find any silver lining in my trials, is it that I know exactly what it feels like to be an unbeliever.



So do I. I was an atheist, the kind of atheist who loved to argue with Christians and thought they were real stupid and loved to make them feel stupid. But I was never the kind who childishly mocked anything he could at any price.



Before you point the finger at "stupidity," do you consider that someone does not create a site like that without tremendous pain and legitimate disappointment with God.



We still have a responsibility to deal with our pain in ways that does not hurt others. To mock and ridicule religious people becasue they turn to God for support in times of pain is sick and stupid. He's trying to crush the hope of suffering people to make himself feel superior.



How do you then, as a believer, respond to someone who has been hurt in that way by calling them stupid?




Because his words are stupid. he has put no thought of any kind into his mocking and ridicule. The whole site from start to Finnish is simple minded, narrow, hateful, he has nothing of any kind of value to say.



Even if you were right, what does that do for the Kingdom? I hope you don't pass through these trials yourself, so you'll never know this firsthand




too late!



but the truth is, there's a lot of bad teaching in churches that is well meant, but it's based on our American ideas, and not on what God really taught us in the Bible. That kind of bad teaching has caused Christians to make a lot of excuses for God that He doesn't need, and that leaves others rightly skeptical. And it's left a lot of people disillusioned and wounded. So before diagnosing this guys stupidity, consider the possible source. And consider what will expand the Kingdom.




that is a very good statement. I agree with you completely. Good point, bravo. Unfortunately that amputee site does absolutely nothing to foster any kind of serious about the issues. The function of it in atheist circles is to give them an  excuse to disregard any kind of answer or argument that Christians give. I went on that guy's board. I posted tons of material and got no serious thought out of them. The only thing they ever said was "show me an expmle of God healing an amputee. just one come on where is it? you don't have one so God is a lie. nothing you can say you matters becasue God is just a big alie in the sky because you can't show me a heald amputee." Even I laed evidence on them of healed amputees they still continued to harp that "that's a lie, that didnt' happen, you can't prove that."

I had good science to prove the miracles of Lourdes. they just continued to squawk, no healing is a miracle until you have an amputee. even a guy growing a new pair of lungs did not impress them because it's not an amputee. So that sight is not furthering the conversion its' closing down the conversation and all it does is give them a chance to squawk and feel superior. They want to boil all of philosophy and all of religion down this one question, no amputee = no God that's it no thought necessary!

That's why it's stupid. Becasue it's simplistic and shallow and it's only advanced as an excuse to ignore all of Christian thoguht.

Up until The Dawkamentalists came on with their hate group act, a lot of Christian apologists kicked ass all over the net. But since atheists learned that it was much more effective to drop the pretense of real thought just vent their hatred there has been an ever shrinking discourse. I now think there are no messages boards anywhere on the net that are worth looking at. none of them at all reflect any sort of intellectual discussion about religious ideas. It is sights like this that are to blame for this state of affairs.

There are a couple of good sites you should look at. One is God is not imaginary, Marshal Brian is Ignorant These guys have done the body of Christ the service of spending their time answering everything thing the guy says, wow! I can't imagine wasting my line on that polavor, but I thank them for doing it.

The other is my own very serious attempt to answer the theodicty question: I advance my own version of the free will defense, which I think has a unqiue angel if I may so, called Soteriological Drama

6 comments:

Mike aka MonolithTMA said...

"So do I. I was an atheist, the kind of atheist who loved to argue with Christians and thought they were real stupid and loved to make them feel stupid. But I was never the kind who childishly mocked anything he could at any price."

How is loving making them look stupid better than mocking?

Metacrock said...

How is loving making them look stupid better than mocking?

In net effect it's not. But I speaking through the lends of my warped perfection of old. It was a more intellectual process. "Making them look stupid" meant engaging in arugment and winning rather than just saying "boo them, I don't like them."

Loren said...

I'm not impressed with any of these sinner-turned-saint stories. They all seem so overwrought and over-the-top. "How eeeeeevil I once was!!!"

That aside, I think that the failure to heal amputees is very telling. A god who does lots and lots and lots of healing is very negligent if It does not also heal amputees. That's because healing of amputees would be VERY obvious and hard to ascribe to other causes.

Furthermore, an omnimax god would be omni-responsible, like it or not. Responsible by omission as well as by commission.

Finally, Metacrock, I once read your entire blog, and I noticed that you repeat yourself a lot. Yet you have not blogged even once on what you might consider the errors of fundamentalism. You've never imagined yourself composing some theses to nail onto the door of some fundie church, as far as I can tell.

Metacrock said...

I'm not impressed with any of these sinner-turned-saint stories. They all seem so overwrought and over-the-top. "How eeeeeevil I once was!!!"

thanks for telling me

That aside, I think that the failure to heal amputees is very telling. A god who does lots and lots and lots of healing is very negligent if It does not also heal amputees. That's because healing of amputees would be VERY obvious and hard to ascribe to other causes.

We've already discussed the concept that God doesn't want to be obvious. don't you ever write things down?

remember the bit about internalizing the good so you wont resent having to be good, if you just got proof God is there and nothing else you would hate God becuase you don't want to believe and you hate God anyway. I think God's existence is irrelevant to you. Exist or not you hate the concept. That's becuase you haven't internalized the proper values.

That only comes form seeking in the heart and that would be negated if there's no need to seek. Remember that?


Furthermore, an omnimax god would be omni-responsible, like it or not. Responsible by omission as well as by commission.

more blather. why can't you remember things? I really want to know why atheists can't rememer things?

how many times have I said the omnis are Aristotelian so we don't' need them? hmmmmm? why can't remember that?

try writing it on your arm


Finally, Metacrock, I once read your entire blog, and I noticed that you repeat yourself a lot.

you must have a lot of time on your hands. I can't imagine any bigger waste of time.


Yet you have not blogged even once on what you might consider the errors of fundamentalism.


sigh, no one remembers the long lost late lamented Fudnie watch. I had a whole blog on it.


You've never imagined yourself composing some theses to nail onto the door of some fundie church, as far as I can tell.

how the hell would know I haven't done that? I used to waste hours in seminary fantasizing abou that.

Loren said...

Metacrock, if you want to believe in a god who hides, go ahead. But please don't do a 180d turn a few blog entries later and describe how evident God is all the time.

As for making it necessary to seek, that would make Heaven almost as bad as Hell, because one would not need to do any seeking in heaven.

As to your blog Fundie Watch, why is it now gone???

Metacrock said...

that's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen anyone write.