The existance of God is something that has been the subject of many a furious debate. From the slightest classroom argument to fullscale wars across the globe the argument of both wether there is a god, and which god it infact is has been something that man has been unable to agree on since the dawning of our intelligence. Even though our intelligence has ascended and historians have pieced together the evolution of religion, from pagan through to its multitude today. The historians can state why changes occured in religion, why each religion came about at a certain time, usually down to war, or some new ruler wanting a tool to control the population. What amazes me is the fact that much of the world still believes wholeheartedly in these spectres created centuries ago.
Of course dispite the religious leaders claims of how many million/billion folowers they have, usually figures that have no factual backing, I have met many supposed followers who I wouldnt class as actual followers of their religion. Talking to several 'christians' many of them admit they dont believe in God, but do follow the principals, morals and the social interation which is being removed from our lives. This is in my eyes a failing of the very basics of a religion. A religion is quite simply a belief in a diety, anything else is purely doing what s/he says.
My first suggestion would be for all religious type people to go into some veriation of budhism, but god knows the country is in a bad enough state without those slackers about. Its all well and good talking about truth and beauty, but not if theres a depression so bad you have to eat a beautifully truthful dog.
I have to admit that I would be interested in seeing how a country without religion but instead a code of morals works. There are many of these about at the moment, since lets face it, all the moral countries that may have existed would have been wiped out by the religious countries a long time ago.
But back to the point at hand, where is God? does he exist?
I quite liked teh anology used in one of Dan Brown's book, where one of the main priesty characters compares gods allowance of ills in the world to a childs skatebaording. Would you stop the child skateboarding because he might hurt himself?
This, i think, is the kind of response you hear in the world, it sounds as though it relates to the point, it sounds like its allowing you to answer your own questions and it does seem to make the answer yes YES you would infact do that, making you feel ever so slightly better. Unfortunately it doesnt answer the question.
Would god let his child skateboard?
Would you give your child and his mates automatic weapons and a fleet of apache gunships, then infect them all with terminal cancer.
Suddenly the the holymans explaination seems just a little less explanative.
Something I read a whileback (I think by Scott Adams, author of Dilbert) states something that I will endeavour to explain and expand on.
According to, for example christianity. God created everything, saw everything and loved everything he had created. God is also Omipotent, this not only means he is everywhere, but means he is everywhere And sees everything AND he sees everything from every angle AND from every possible perspective. So lets try and see a human from gods perspective. He not only sees an interesting person, he sees interesting organs, interesting atoms and interesting electrons. this means that to god a rock at most levels is as interesting as a person. A tree would probably be more interesting. The solar system a work of perfect geometry, would be the same as an atom with the sun being the proton, bplanets being electrons. The whole galaxy being a molecule of an organ of some infetesimal being mabey?
The point most notably being made here is that if god was realy omnipotent he would see nothing special in humans. Despite this the argument is actually FOR the existance of God, after all, it explains why god lets these things happen, he simply doesnt notice. With so many other amazing things going on, why would he?