Why God's Not a Ridiculous Concept

People do terrible things while wearing Jesus tee shirts. It's a branding nightmare. Thanks to these religious sadists, skepticism has gained traction. Add technological advances, which increasingly lend themselves to the idea that "man is the measure of all things," and you have a perfect storm that could wipe New Jerusalem from the face of the earth.

In today's climate, anyone who still manages to believe in spirit is either (1) ignorant, (2) ideologically entrenched via force of habit and ego, or (3) operating by reasons on which Christian hypocrisy and materialist logic have no bearing.

Concerning reason #3 ...

I still believe in God, because the mind is non-material, yet it gives birth to the material. (The brain alone is worthless. Ask corpses.)

I still believe in God, because the medical community's "death by natural causes" catch-all, reads like an admission that they don't know why people die. Death and birth, as matters of existence, are the first questions in metaphysics. Further, our inability to address children's profound question, "Where do babies come from?" shows that we also don't know why people live. The matter, then, appears to be above our pay grade.

I still believe in God, because no matter what the answer to the chicken-or-the-egg riddle, (a) I can't make a chicken, (b) I can't make an egg, and (c) I cannot convince myself that either could have burst into existence from nothingness. Matter is either eternal or made, and I would find the latter absurd only if human beings were credited. We're too limited to serve as "the measure of all things." "All" is a small word with a huge meaning. Stances against intelligent design are byproducts of megalomania, ego-centrism, and reverse-dogma that masquerade as science. The skeptic's problem with God may be a conflict of interest. At the very least, anyone who looks around the grand universe and sees nothing suggestive of intelligence, defines the term "intelligent" in a way that I fail to apprehend. Are we impressed with computing, but not the nervous system? With the camera, but not the eye? Medicine, but not the ground? Aircraft, but not birds? Science's "creation" = divine patent infringement.

Popular questions, like, "If God exists, then why does He allow evil?" are premature, because it's illogical to criticize the character of an imaginary God. And people who ask, "Who made God?" (a) cannot fathom an eternal being because they themselves are not eternal beings, and/or (b) suffer from a selective blindness to the nature of causality, which manifests before them every day in this world (a row of falling dominoes must have a catalyst, lest we argue that they have been falling forever; a system of causality without a "First Mover" [to use Thomas Aquinas' language] is no system at all).

So, I continue to believe, while fundamentalist nut jobs shoot up abortion clinics, warmongers carpet-bomb poor nations with the blessing of Counterfeit Jehovah, and shallow-thinking skeptics call "intelligent Christian" an oxymoron. So be it. Which is translated, amen. These things are immaterial.

Pun intended.