From a purely logical standpoint, I don’t care if you’re religious or not. We all have our different beliefs based on what we’re willing to see or willing to excuse.
While we can make our cases for or against the existence of God and for or against the existence of specific gods, there really is no proof one way or the other.
Atheists, for example, have no proof that God doesn’t exist. I would even speculate that, considering the complexities of the universe, the Earth and the human body, it probably requires more faith not to believe in some sort of cosmic being than to believe in one.
Intellectually speaking, I have never understood the theory that God doesn’t exist. But just because I’m more than likely right and they’re more than likely wrong doesn’t mean that I go publicly mocking a whole entire group of people’s beliefs on a public platform.
Ok. Ok. Yes, I mock liberals up and down. But both logic and history prove that they’re insanely and detrimentally incorrect in their beliefs and their policies. So that’s different… especially when they’re actively destroying lives and nations every day.
Atheists have no such excuse, considering that most of the people too many of them are set on silencing are not actually harming anybody with their beliefs. Since they seem to most prominently pick on Christians, let’s explore what the religion entails…
When practiced correctly, Christianity is all about putting God first. In practice, that means obeying His laws in word and deed, which – more often than not – actually ends up in healthier relationship, healthier lifestyles and healthier attitudes.
What’s wrong with any of that?
Admittedly, there are people who misuse the label, but that is on their heads. So why do God-deniers – to borrow famed atheist Richard Dawkins’ nonintellectual argumentative style – such as American Atheists President David Silverman have to be so antagonistic?
Viciously Offensive and Ideologically Close-Minded
Right now, there’s a big to-do about placing a remnant of the World Trade Center at the almost completed memorial. Because the remaining beams are in the shape of a cross, people are protesting based on arguments that the lone symbol is offensive to other faiths represented in the tragedy and, of course, the old separation of church and state shtick.
Logically speaking, I can understand those arguments. I might not agree with them and, in the latter case, I might be able to debunk them altogether. But I understand them all the same.
What I don’t understand is Silverman saying something as offensive as: “The WTC cross has become a Christian icon. It has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that their god, who couldn’t be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross. It’s a truly ridiculous assertion.”
Or is it?
Last year, while reading “Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide” – a book I’ve mentioned several times before – I found myself asking how in the world God could actually be loving considering the horrible things the book records.
After struggling with the issue for some time, I sensed an answer: “Yes, but how much more horrible would those abuses have been if nobody cared about the victims?”
In other words, a loving God gives us free will to choose Him or not choose Him, instead of performing like mindless robots. Because the loving God wants to be loved too.
Unfortunately, that means we can choose not only to disregard Him but also to disregard each other as well. But when that happens, a loving God holds our hand and cries with us and assures us that, if we just keep trusting in Him, everything will turn out right in the end.