We must recognise, and soon, that our belief in a divine, omnipotent and masterful ‘god’ is insulting to the magnificence of our species.
If god exists, then god is responsible.
G. Papanastasiou, 18/1/05
So far, the total aid pledged for the Asian Tsunami Disaster, which killed up to 200,000 people, stands at about US billion. US President, George W Bush has offered 0 million on behalf of the ‘people of the United States’. Other countries, including Australia, have pledged according to their foreign policy objectives and the propensity for any ‘stinginess’ to bring international shame.
But how much is this in real terms? In order to gain an understanding, we must gain some perspective, so here goes:
The cost of a single B-2 Stealth Bomber is US.1 billion dollars.
If we logically follow this argument further, we soon arrive at that grandest of questions – Does god exist??
If ‘he’ does, then how could ‘he’ allow such a disaster to occur? And why would ‘he’ let total human apathy exacerbate the suffering of these already destroyed people?
Before we attempt to tackle answers, let’s try to gain an even better perspective on the US billion in pledged aid:
· So far, the US war in Iraq has cost US8 billion.
· Last year, the people of the US spent US billion on cosmetic surgery.
· The recent Huygens probe to Saturn’s moon Titan cost US billion.
So allow me, if you will, to indulge in an answer for that land-mine of a question… NO. There is no god. None. Nada. Zip.
Hence, ‘he’ had nothing to do with the disaster (or anything else for that matter).
Humanity invented god – much the same way we invented the mobile phone and the flushing toilet. Except that god serves a more essential purpose – to soothe the frustration of an elevated consciousness – one unable to understand the universe or its place within it. (So, man invents god… to invent man.)
Imagine being aware of everything around you, with an insatiable curiosity but with a very slow and frustrating ability to explain things. Like a conscious ancestor encountering (for the first time) the flashing and Earth-trembling phenomenon of lightning, you may attribute it to something divine, and extremely powerful – like a ‘god’. So an explanation is invented, for this and many other mysteries. Perfectly and promptly.
Today, our answers are ever more rapid and material , and when we wonder about (and question) that most convenient of ‘god’ arrangements, we get the most pious of answers from ‘his’ agents… “God works in mysterious ways!” they tell us. (i.e. No-one has a clue.) Everything about ‘him’ in fact, is a complete mystery. Yet ‘he’, as they fervently argue, surely exists! Beyond any doubt!
Rubbish.
Having established that god is ‘nutin-but-a-boo-boo’, we’re free to move beyond rationalising suffering according to ‘him’, to designating responsibility on nature’s unpredictability and man’s utter savagery towards man (and all other living things). When god’s no longer part of the equation, there’s only humanity after the equals sign. Which leads to a very sobering realisation…
Suddenly, humanity is mostly responsible for humanity’s suffering and not this or any other mysterious ‘god’.
This admission is daunting – in essence requiring not so much action in search of solutions, but action toward the prevention of problems. Which is, of course, unbearable and undesirable for humanity.
You see, there are ‘vested interests’ with other ideas. Ultra-individualism and its political and economic practice, organises the world according to ‘me’. In this reality, suffering is an unwanted but unavoidable outcome, and always justified in the prevention or limiting of future suffering.
I once wrote that ‘Life sees god in man as man sees god in life, and vanity is born.’ Looking round in wonder, humanity attributes everything to ‘god’ while all other life, fearful of but one master, would see humanity as the only godlike creature… an absurdity that begets our vanity.
We must recognise, and soon, that our belief in a divine, omnipotent and masterful ‘god’ is insulting to the magnificence of our species.
Our consciousness may have naturally evolved with superstitions, but once they are understood for the tranquillisers they are, they become unnecessary. In fact, from this point onward, they become dangerous.
And not for me anyway…
But… hey, let’s say for arguments sake that I’m wrong… Let’s say that ‘he’ really exists.
Then why wouldn’t ‘he’ be responsible for the Tsunami disaster? Why wouldn’t ‘he’ be the reason for the death of over 200,000 people and the inexhaustible suffering of countless others? And if he wasn’t the direct cause, why didn’t ‘he’ prevent it? Or warn us of the impending death of thousands of children – at least?
Has ‘he’ no compassion?
Either he did it or he didn’t stop it. Which makes ‘him’ responsible - either way. No amount of theological crapology can convince me otherwise.
I wonder then, why anyone would want to worship ‘him’.
Original: If god exists, then god is responsible.