FROM MY CORNER
My comments about god and natural disaster strategy were, as I have said, attacked by a couple of people. Let me try to clarify what I apparently presented inadequately.
We are dealing with the different viewpoint about what I wanted to write about and what and how I actually did write. The counter critique to my critique is an example of the long standing opposing views about the general concept of gods or “God.”
Long before a single “God” was considered by Jews, Christians, and Muslims as the probably reality of the universe, the Greeks and others had created a whole army of different gods.
The concept of gods came about when certain specific people proposed and preached that such creatures existed. Whether they were first proposed as Myth or as Truth is not totally clear. After all it happened a relatively long time ago, and we had no digital device to save the first words about the subject.
We know, however, that after time agreement was generally reached by alleged experts in the religion field of study that: only one God exists. Now, it is interesting to look closely at how this came about.
Over 2,000 years ago in the Middle East, a very hot and inhospitable place to live, most people earned their living in the deserts herding goats and camels, and harvesting dates. (Yes, that’s a simplified generalization I make up to roughly describe my overview of the situation at the time, but accurate enough for our purposes.)
Science, a systematic way to strive to understand the tangible world, had not yet been conceived of by the facile mind of humans. So, someone proposed that invisible gods must have made the universe and everything and everybody in it. Plop! There it was: a new theory of where all that sand came from. And us. And the camels and goats.
Those of us who are not believers in this theory see this as a grave weakness in the thinking of believers. No God could exist if People had not existed to create and propose one. If we were not here then, we could not now have in our minds the concept of gods or God.
It’s a matter of which came first: the chicken or the egg? God or People?
We non-believers point out that science does not say plainly as absolute fact that gods or God do not exist. But, the tangible evidence available to us certainly shows us that the probability is that gods and God are figments of the human imagination.
It began in other words as a scientific theory that no one to this time has ever been able to prove through tangible evidence is actually true. And tangible evidence against the theory that gods or God exist is voluminous and substantially convincing.
Believers base their conviction on “Faith,” and Thomas Jefferson’s first law of religious freedom established in Virginia made clear that Americans may believe in the concept of invisible gods or God – so long as 100% non-believers may also equally believe in their science-based probability that no gods or God exist.
And here we are today, still battling about the two opposing concepts.
What I was trying to get at in my weakly-written commentary is that non-believers have every right to intellectually attack the concept of God that 90% of American people seem to believe in. And that if the believers’ God really exists, surely they could have – and still could and should – create a collaboration among 100% of all believers to institutionalize it nationally as part of our economic system.
Non-believers’ argument is basically that if all people would focus on the tangible reality which we are all able to measure, weigh, and test in many ways, we would all accept 100% responsibility for how we assist one another. We could not allocate any of the responsibility for how we treat each other to some invisible gods or God. Or to an equally invisible Devil, who also cannot be proved to exist.
I was obliquely proposing in my commentary that if we did all believe the more tangible scientific theory, it stands to reason we could come up with comprehensive ways to deal with all the natural disasters that befall us – such as Hurricanes and the like.
True: I was also tangentially trying to dig a bit at Mr. Trump, who claims to believe in Christianity while discarding 10,000 years of scientific evidence. Evidence that culminates in the probability that Human-created climate change does in fact exist, and is dangerous enough to require exhaustively collaborative worldwide work upon it.
Dropping out of the scientific work should not be an option just because one does not believe.
These subjects are too complicated to be covered by me or anyone in a short commentary,such as “From My Corner.” I’m certain this does not end the debate. But for those on both sides of the fence, maybe it will provide another way of looking at it.
Anybody want to pitch in here, the door is open.