(Written while I embraced hard line Atheist status)
If we are to assume a god is in control of our existence, what degree of control should be reasonable to expect from this god?
What degree of involvement should we expect?
Writings that speak of the widely believed in god of the old testament, for example, show him to be a merciless, heartless, unfeeling, take no prisoners type of being many times over. Very much a powerful entity. Very much involved. But also very much like a tyrant to those who dared to oppose his prophets. Sure he behaved once in awhile... but, man, don't get this guy irritated!
Where has that kick ass sort of a god gone to?
It seems this god has evolved over the ages. Once feared and revered on account of what he might do to you, he now is the god of capricious bestowals of blessings (and cursings) suspiciously in sync with random occurrence no matter if one believes or not.
The Old Testament god was very capable of destruction and showing his merciless powers. Here are a few examples of his controlling influence and involvement in human affairs:
God instantly kills a man for reaching out to merely steady the ark of the covenant
God kills all of the first born sons of the Egypt
God can part the Red Sea
God will drown an entire army
God kills Lot's wife by turning her to stone because she looked back upon her homeland while it was being destroyed
God allows three of his chosen servants to be able to stand in a blazing hot furnace unharmed
God allows one of his prophets to play with hungry lions without getting eaten
God will kill you if you are gay and living in a 2000 b.c. predominantly gay town
God will have you killed if you pick up sticks on the Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36)
God's army would only be able to slaughter the opposing army if the prophet's arms were raised up above his head. If the prophets arms fell, the opposing army would start to kill off those in god's army
God is so powerful that if you blow a trumpet really loud under his command, city walls made of blocks will crumble down
God sometimes talks to his prophets through donkeys
If you happen to be found worshipping idols, chances are, the OT God will find a way to have you killed
If there is a doubt as to which god is best, some times the prophets would hold "Who's God is the Best God" contests with the local errant non-legit priests. God will prove he is the best god out there by sending fire from heaven to burn all the priests alive thus vindicating his prophet.
God told Ezekial to eat barley cakes baked with "dung that cometh out of man"; not too tasty!
If God's children get too wicked, he drowns them all... hundreds of thousands if not millions of them.
And finally, God loves you so much that he demonstrates this by doing nothing more than... having his first only begotten son killed on your behalf, because he could not, with his infinite powers, think up a more humane way of showing this to us.
This is only a small sample of God's personality. Seems a pretty grim father figure type to me. Nevertheless, he does come off pretty powerful... and capable of intervention if he so desires. Yet, today he is vastly different. A quiet god... mild mannered even. Practically hidden. Has he evolved to this form? But he is supposed to be unchanging, the same today yesterday and forever. I suppose Christians could attribute the earthquakes in Pakistan or the Thailand/India Tsunami to God's wrath. Whom would that make his people? What did the Pakistanis do to deserve tens of thousands of earthquake caused deaths? Pakistan does fit the OT God behavior models of slaying those who do not believe in Him correctly (holding out that western religion is the true one in this case). But, then, what about the World Trade Center 9/11 tragedy or New Orleans? Or the 1918 bird flu pandemic that wiped out hundreds of thousands? Or the Holocaust? These could qualify as scourges. Perplexing.
Assuming the evident powers of God as manifest in scripture, and examining the fact that God claims to be able to change the lives or personalities of humans drastically, we should scrutinize how effective God is for real. He should be able to change lives. Personality character flaws should be made whole by and large across the believer's board. By that I mean the believer category should be significantly farther ahead than the non-believer in terms of beneficial attributes.
Yet, it is not the case.
In fact, in fundamental religions claiming to be God's One and Only True Church on earth, depression is at an all time high. Prozac usage is off the charts in heavily concentrated religious states. Where is the all powerful God? Why is he not supporting his children's pleas for sustainment? Or did he answer these pleas by causing the development of Prozac?
Sounds a little suspicious to me.
My observation is that perhaps God is a weaker god than previous times. Maybe he is just weary of being god? Weary of having to fix the same flaws in every generation. After 3000 generations throughout recorded written history, I would tire of it too if I were him. Or maybe god is incapable of delivering the goods promised by world religion today. Why is it that so many of those who do not believe in the gods can have dynamic lives full of self-actualization? Why are the ratios and demographics pretty much the same in terms of living a full life whether one believes or not? How does that get explained away by fundamentalists? Personality types? How do they know that those inside their religions who are well-balanced, self-actualizing individuals would not also be this way had they been born without a religious world view? Odds are against them that God is the reason.
In fact, when religion holds out promises of joy, peace and an enriched life full of blessings... and the individual signing up for this life is hardly capable, it is a classic set up for depression. Churches across the world are filled with rationalities for failure to reap the blessings. What is insidious is the blame is placed squarely on the shoulders of the individual. He is told that he is not reading or praying or serving enough. He is told he needs to show his god that he really believes in him in order to effectuate a bestowal of mercy upon his head.
"Do more, give more", he is told.
"Lose yourself and then you will find yourself", he is challenged.
And some do find themselves. It isn't half bad advice you know. But do we really need an organization to prod us to do this? One that requires that we do it... not only that but requires 10% of our income to boot? And why is there a dreadful curse attached to the tithing requirement? Why am I going to "burn up" in Jesus' presence if I don't pay up? What is with that?
In the losing of ones self, is one creating a temporary salve, a bandaid over the wound?
What about the poor souls who, no matter what they do, will never self-actualize inside this system? They are left frustrated and alone to sort through a sea of question marks of why they never quite get there. Usually, the guilt is unbearable and they leave the church anyhow.
Or. We find the religious figure head throwing out encouragement to NOT expect too much out of life. Time and time again I read monthly religious periodicals that come into my hands and the message is striking.
"Look for the simple things"
"Count your blessings, wherever you may be in life"
"Appreciate the beauty of this earth"
Pardon me. Does that not sound like dumbing things down a bit? Why do I need religion to do these three things? Perhaps religion is malfunctioning so badly that the watering down of god's abilities to be effectual in human life is needed!
Would you like to do some serious change in your personality? Control your temper? Give up an addiction? Be kinder to a spouse? Chances are your religion will encourage you to immerse yourself in reading scriptures and praying very frequently. Coupled with serving more in the axillaries of the church. Chances are you will be told to starve yourself (fasting). Doing these indoctrinational exercises with a purpose in mind focuses one on the task at hand. There is a goal. How do we know that the correction in behavior (if it occurs at all) is not just from increased focal acuity?
See. If change comes after doing the self-indoctrinations, God gets all the credit. Then how would you explain Tony Robbins? No god in his program yet hundreds of thousands are paying good money (probably much much less than an honest tithe) and are experiencing dynamic changes in there lives. Franklin Covey day planner programs with the Covey line of books to assist in personal synergistic transformations. Jenny Craig. Dr. Phil. Dr. Laura. Motivational speakers abound. There are countless ways to make positive changes in one's life without god. It usually requires that one do something coupled with consistent focus. I think I demonstrated that clearly.
What is unclear is why so many want to cheapen their own ability to effect good change in their lives by crediting a magical force from above. In a way, this lends itself to enslavement. If one never realizes that they can make changes on their own, they never really synchronize with their truest identity. They will always be sort of co-dependent on an external source of power to do anything.
I mean, cue the football player in the endzone on bended knee thanking his god that he allowed this touchdown. What is with that? Does god really care about touchdowns? Or was it the years of practice that got this man into the endzone and god really, truly, had nothing to do with it. Why thank a god for an outcome you made happen on account of your diligent practice and expertise? It's annoying.
My point is that we humans are giving ourselves away far too cheaply. If god does not care about touchdowns, on account that both teams score them as they thank their gods, then is there a god who really cares about your sales pitch in the office? Is there really a god steering you to say certain phrases and words in order to make some sale? Or is it just you, who has learned the art of persuasiveness that millions of non theists also know and enjoy and reap financial benefit from??
Think about them apples.
Update March 2006: I have since humbled myself a bit. While I still feel strongly about each and every word I wrote above, I am now willing to concede that the concept of Atheism is just as dogmatic as is Theism. I observe that there could be one god, or two or 500 gods or it could be a three lined algorithm that started this universe and has since dissolved into nothingness... and that nobody knows for sure what it really is.
