The critique thing is currently on hiatus, partly because I can't be bothered, partly because it isn't really that popular. But I will, maybe, finish it if I see anything that sounds unbelievably wrong in the Fun Theory Sequence. In any case, what I'd like to talk about today is something a little antitheistic, not entirely, of course, I'm just following a train of thought I had recently. If you are a religious person, I suggest you don't read this so we don't have a bit of a falling out. It's sad to lose antinatalists from the cause.
Recently I had this thought: Why do Christians, and members of other religions who believe in a great afterlife, cry at funerals? Because they think the deceased may be going to hell? In most cases, no they don't even think that. Because they miss them? Why? They'll see them in about 20-40 years or so. It's a long time, but its nothing to mourn over, surely. The only reason I can see why the religious cry at funerals is because of the inherent, in-built fear of death inside us. Anyone who truly believed that their kin were going to a greater place than in life would be happy for them, instead of being upset. Do Christians cry out of joy when one of their loved ones die? I doubt it.
Another accidentally irreligious thought I've had is why religious people cry at all. Why ever be upset or in a poor emotional state? Your deity has made a great world for you, even though humans have ruined it a bit. You can't possibly be unhappy if you're religious, if the scripture is as soul-strengthening as you say it is. And yet there are tonnes of depressed religious people out there. I don't understand myself why Christians, specifically, don't just rely on God a little more, because that's something they're really supposed to do. For example,if faith can move mountains, then why do services exist for people to move their stuff to a new house? Why is it that God can be relied on to help you get through a tough situation mentally and 'spiritually' but never physically? Maybe he's omnipotent, omnipresent and omnibenevolent, but he's pretty lazy. I guess the same sentiment has been made before me as the 'Why Won't God Heal Amputees?" conundrum. Why is it that God only works his magic when the situation could be explained away by science? On this documentary on people jumping from the Golden Gate Bridge, one kid was apparently 'miraculously' saved by a seal, and then attributed it to God. To God, nothing is impossible. Any power used is never depleted. Why then, did He send a seal? He could have sent an angel, easily. Why didn't he? Angels were all over the place in Biblical times, so why not one in the world now? Would certainly save a lot of souls and convert a lot of people. But no, a seal. Which could have done that on its own, by coincidence. But maybe I'm wrong here. Maybe God has to make sure that people don't convert based on any pesky scientific evidence lying around, they should convert based solely on 'faith' (a strong religious upbringing in the family/horrible fear of the unknown). Though the problem with that is, early Christians supposedly had hard evidence to believe with. Angels, Jesus's resurrection, prophecies coming true (could be said about any religion, really), and yet, they God doesn't seem to care to give anyone any kind of show these days. There are two scenarios that could explain that: (a Jesus has already come back, and everyone good has been taken up already (would certainly explain why this world is so hellish). No need for any attempt from God to give the unworthy goats any table scraps (like the Canaanite woman, haha). OR (b 'God' is a concept that cannot even be defined, let alone imagined, and therefore any proposition of Him/Her/It existing is illogical from the get-go. It's like saying Shirpadoodles exist. When someone asks, "What's a Shirpadoodle?", they reply, "No one could ever know".