Posted by Roaring Lovely on November 23,
It is not a surprise that people would eventually say that men created God in their own image rather than the vice-versa. However, it is both wise and stupid to say so. Originaly God was conceived as some unknown creator. There was no much description about God. The ‘spokesmen of God’ came latter to tell us guess what, that creator you are talking of is some superhuman being who closely watches your every step to check if you are messing with his rules. The creator has nothing to do with ‘image of man’. Infact human doesn’t create things from scratch at all so what does it mean to say the concept of creator is ‘in man’s image’? It is nothing of the sort.
Apparently people neaded something more than some unknown creator. They neaded a super-daddy or a super-mom. They neaded assurance that everything they want can be achieved. So they invented an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent superhuman being. To justify the rulership of this being, the superhuman would have to be the creator. So you owe much to this superhuman. This superhuman evolved into a pair of gumboots, worn in rainy seasons and thrown out during the sunny seasons. He is now the source-the source of everything sweet. This notion of omnipotent, ommiscient, omnibenevolent being have become so tangled with the concept of creator that people can never conceive one without the other.
Of course no one can understand an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being, at least not, one that nevertheless creats a world like this. No one can understand absurdities. So the idea that ‘God is beyond understanding’ became in built to the concept of God. Like dogs salivating at the bell instead of food, people came to fall in love with anything ‘beyond understanding’. They linked it to God in the same way a dog can link a ringing bell to food. Because no one can understand nonsense, a fertile grownd for all manner of horse shit was prepared. People now buy into all manner of rubbish because they are ‘beyond understanding’. They have forgotten that some could just be ringing bells but with no food that follow. They salivate, anyway.
An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being have ironically came to be hated. One wonders why some things don’t happen if there is some being sitted somewhere who can do everything. The advocates of the devil would try to convince you that this being cares so much about your free will that he is willing to send you into eternal fire wether you like it or not, instead of creating a paradise for all whether some like it or not. Their story contradict itself, anyway. Things happen to us whether we want it or not, anyway! Their rationalization does not conduct electricity.
The correct explanation of why the world is as it is is that the creator is not omnipotent, omniscient nor omnibenevolent. This may be strange to some. Rejecting existence of ‘omni’ being is often seen as rejecting existence of God all together. But this is fallacious. There is no provision for ‘omnis’ in the concept of ‘creator’. This was latter added in by ‘spokesmen of God’. I have seen that the major problem many atheists have with ‘God’ is the ‘omnis’. Most cannot seperate the concept of ‘creator’ from the concept of an ‘omni’ being. So they end up rejecting creator alongside rejecting the ‘omni’. The argument is that ‘omni’ is absurd, therefore ‘creator’ is absurd. They have not considered a non omnipotent, non omniscient and non omni benevolent creator.
There is zero evidence of an omnipotent, omniscient or omnibenevolent being and there are many evidences to the contrary. However, there are plenty of compelling evidences of an intelligent creator. Life is just but one example. We see unkown mind in nature. But we have never seen an act that requires omnipotence plus it is not even conceivable how such an act would appear. It is these evidences that drove all cultures to beleive in some creator. There would have been no much resistance to ‘creator’ idea had people stopped at just that: some unknown, intelligent being. Instead, people decided to ‘know’ this being. They concocted all manner of stories around this being. The worst of them is that ‘he” must be omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.