God is tragedy

Stan Duncan's "What God's Role in Tragedy Really Is" is yet another example of how pathetic many theists beliefs can be. It seems that either Duncan doesn't really believe in what he says he does or he is exceptional good at self-delusion. His lame excuses about for God's lack of benevolence is are as full of shit as they are old and thoroughly debunked.

The following paragraph I found particularly irksome:
"God doesn't kill people. Storms, tsunamis, earthquakes, and human beings kill people. God didn't cause the nightmares of Banda Aceh and Southeast Asia any more than God caused Hurricanes Sandy or Katrina or the 6,000 deaths (so far) by Ebola in East Africa. It is true that God is very much in the storms and wars, but God is there in the healing not the killing. God is in the mending not the destroying."

The problem with this approach is that it blatantly contradicts the notion that this God is supposedly the source of all things. So, yes, if Duncan and like-minded theists' God does exist that Being does kill. Even if you try weaseling out of responsibility by trying to back-pedal on God's omnipotence, if this Supreme Being created humanity then death is also it's responsibility. Death is innate to all known living things which means it must have been designed into life. God is still a killer and the author of countless tragedies.

Whether Duncan is self-deluded, willfully ignorant, or just an intellectually stunted fool does not change the conclusion that if God (the abstract version) exists then God must be the source of all things whether they are deemed to be good or bad. Make up excuses for God's negative side is just ridiculous and a further indication of how weak religion and religious thinking really is.

Insert head in sand box

Thanks to yet another disaster a number of theists and non-theists are revisiting that age old conundrum of reconciling an all powerful all good God with evil. Personally, I find it foolish to accept it as a conundrum at all. I see it as a pretty simple straightforward choice. Either you accept reality unadorned or you subscribe to a personally/socially constructed fantasy. After all, the "conundrum" is by its own terms irreconcilable. Once you accept that God is all powerful then God has to be the source of everything. How can God be "all good" and yet be the only possible source of evil?

I do understand that choosing between reality as it is and a comforting delusion can be a very difficult and emotionally charged decision. I in no way want to belittle the thoughts and feelings of theists but I also see no reason not to point what seems so blatantly obvious from my own perspective. It also leads to a basic choice on my part when I come across these types of discussions and arguments. I can either scream in frustration or find some type of entertainment and reassurance that our species isn't completely loopy. I prefer the latter.

There were a few sections of a recent Religious News Service piece that did make me chuckle a bit. I came across this little gem in "Where is God when evil strikes?" and had to laugh.

"But they still skirt the central question. Why did an omnipotent God allow Newtown? How can a vicious tornado kill kids when God is good?
There is, alas, no good answer."

Yes, there is. God is a human construction. Sometimes answers can be simple. I still am amazed that such blatantly obvious answers go ignored. If a person shoots lots of people. That individual bears direct responsibility. We as a society may also bear some of the responsibility. Why look beyond those two sources? It has far greater explanatory ability and can be verified. If a tornado tears through a town the damage is directly attributable to that example of extreme weather. Why add the element of an unverifiable highly disputable supernatural agent? What does it really help?

I had to laugh. I don't have enough hair left to risk ripping it out over such foolish nonsense.