The God’s Will Fallacy
…during (Timothy) Dwight’s tenure, since he personally delivered more than two hundred sermons to undergraduates on the dangers of religious infidelity. One of his most memorable perorations proclaimed the immorality of smallpox vaccination, introduced by Dr. William Jenner in 1796. An earlier form of inoculation against smallpox had been employed by progressive, educated New Englanders like the Adams family since the 1760s. In a departure from the general eighteenth-century approval of scientific advances—a predilection of many orthodox believers as well as freethinkers—Dwight argued that if God had decided from all eternity that an individual’s fate was to die of smallpox, it was a sin to interfere with the divine plan through a man-made trick like vaccination.”
The above quote is from Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism
pedantic and extreme, has real relevancy. The quote above illustrates this nicely. Mr. Dwight’s lack of empathy for the suffering of his fellow human beings is corrupted by the fallacy of “God’s Will”. When put into practice, millions of lives are adversely affected.
This is just one example of the corrupting influence that religion can have on society. This is why we need a popular movement based on the values of humanism. Values that put the welfare of all human beings first and foremost.
9 Comments »
Leave a Reply
-
Archives
- April 2013 (1)
- March 2013 (1)
- February 2013 (3)
- January 2013 (5)
- December 2012 (1)
- November 2012 (7)
- October 2012 (2)
- September 2012 (9)
- August 2012 (8)
- July 2012 (10)
- June 2012 (7)
- May 2012 (4)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
“I find these concepts to be grossly arrogant and selfish”
I don’t hold to Reformed Theology, but this doesn’t make those doctrines false. I know you know that too, so why argue against those particular doctrines from the point of distaste?
Just because these ideas are unpleasant doesn’t make them false anymore than atheism entailing that when we die we are absolutely gone is unsettling.
So my question is, why should I not believe Limited Atonement and Unconditional Election are true regardless of their discomfort, arrogance, or selfishness?
Mr. Barron,
A God that would create humans for the purpose of torturing them is unworthy of worship.
Epicurus was right.
Unfortunately that too is irrelevant to whether God exists. Whether he is a monster or a saint God is in control. Also whether you believe he deserves worship is irrelevant to his existence. It is also a strawman to introduce the idea of torture, there is a fundamental difference between torment and torture. You should at least onject to an accurate description to Christian theology.
Unfortunately that too is irrelevant to whether God exists. Whether he is a monster or a saint God is in control. Also whether you believe he deserves worship is irrelevant to his existence. It is also a strawman to introduce the idea of torture, there is a fundamental difference between torment and torture. You should at least onject to an accurate description to Christian theology. Too many flaws in your argument, perhaps you’ll re
Mr. Baron,
If god existed I might even find away to agree with you. If he did and I did I might say that it was gods will that the vaccine be created.
I find it impossible to reconcile with a theology that is based on a god with a criminally sadistic bent.
First, sorry about the sloppy double post, I responded from my phone and it wasn’t responding the way it normally does when I post. My apologies.
But–and maybe this is the answer in itself– I realize you can’t necessarily fully explore and write about every issue, I guess you have to assume some points just to make your main point. But I think you have assumed too much here.
If we are going to say “God is evil…” based on some Christian doctrine and some perceived understanding of the biblical description, I think maybe fleshing some examples out a bit would help. But we also have to ask, “is this incident only explainable by evil means?” I thnk sometimes skeptics rush to conclusions based on a cursory browsing of texts.
So what is criminally sadistic, and why is your conclusion of criminally sadistic the only possible understanding?
I am not saying god is evil. I am saying there is no god.
A theology the leans so heavily on punishment and the ramifications of offending this god and the notion that suffering is a part of this gods indecipherable plan, simply confirms for me my belief that no god exists.
I will say there is compelling evidence that, with all the killing done in the name of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic god, a belief in god is evil
I will right away snatch your rss feed as I can not find your e-mail subscription hyperlink or newsletter service. Do you have any? Kindly let me understand so that I may subscribe. Thanks.