Disasters -- Claims by God Believers
(Top Posts - Distance From Belief
in theism - 031709)

In response to the following post, The
Physics of the Supernatural (God)
someone wrote:

> 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
various explanations:

 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.

- - -