Disasters -- Claims by God Believers
(Top Posts - Distance From
in theism - 031709)
In response to the following post, The
Physics of the Supernatural (God)
> You are not
serious - are you?
Religionists (many) are serious about
their particular gods, so something
other than blind faith would be appro-
priate if they, indeed, want naturalism
to be subordinate to supernaturalism.
As for God and physics, they magic
up God causality. One wonders what
they posit regarding how God sup-
posedly interacts with physics.
When disasters happen, they adopt
o Humans are to blame (some de-
voted believers assert), usually
picking something they think
their version of God does not
like, and blaming humans who
do that unlikeable thing for the
disaster, leaving God with ulti-
mate blame translated by be-
lievers to fear of God guilt-trip
o Nature is to blame, but God
couldn't or didn't intervene be-
cause, well, just because, and
at that point, many believers
resort to either blaming nature
as if God is guiltless (see below)
or as if God(s) is(are) justified
for his/its/her/their involvement
in the disaster (or lack of doing
anything to prevent the disaster)
due to the above guilt-trip.
o Natural risks are divorced by
some believers from their God
being involved, those believers
having an amazing ability to cre-
dit God for things they like, and
blame anything other than God
for things they don't like.
In all cases, whatever posit they
wish to make is seriously flawed,
for without any evidence, all they
have is their imagination.
God _____. Human imagination.
No evidence. No proof. Just claims.
- - -