1. Where did God(s) originate from?
This is a conspicuous one, and everybody knows it. Of the real current religions, just the Hindus have made any kind of endeavor at tending to it through the idea of Brahman. In all honesty, the Greeks and Norse religions improved occupation of clarifying this than do the self-declared monotheisms. At any rate they (and a large number of different religions) recognized a starting before there were divine beings. Try not to expect anybody, even the Mormons or Scientologists who have their divine beings on a unidentifiable planet, to give you god’s address at any point in the near future. Trying to say that god “dependably was” appears a poor utilization of human creative ability.
2. Why does God(s) think about people?
Alright, the Hindu divine beings couldn’t care less such a great amount, as they and we are all on the same wheel of rebirth, and they are mostly like numerous more established religions where it’s a “you do this for me, and I will do this for you” kind of course of action – at any rate when they are not off drinking soma. Be that as it may, with the monotheisms, you need to ask why their god(s) trouble. The Hebrew’s god adored the scent of smoldered creature substance in this way, while there was a Temple around at which the penances were made, YHWH got something out of the relationship. What’s more, in Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda needs individuals as his partner against Angra Mainyu, practically similarly as Odin needs saints to battle with him at the last clash of Ragnarök. In any case, the divine forces of Christianity and Islam needn’t bother with fighters, as its as of now pre-appointed that they will rise triumphant.
So why do divine beings think about people? Since they need to be loved? They don’t have sympathy for people, since they send all non-devotees (most by far of people) to endless enduring. So why spare some by any stretch of the imagination? Kindly don’t say, “since they cherish us,” unless you can look a starving youngster in the face and advise her how the god who made her adores her so much that he is sending her to hellfire for time everlasting. Let’s face honest, best clarification is presumably that the divine beings were exhausted thus humankind and all creation is what might as well be called a Sony PlayStation for a godlikeness.
3. Why is enduring permitted?
In the event that the world is made by a flawless or all intense or about all effective god(s), then why is it so defective itself? In the event that an awesome being needed to make an impeccable spot, say like paradise, why make a blemished spot like reality? On the off chance that paradise is the place you, as the jumping being, need to invest all your energy, why make something else? Why put such a large number of souls through a lifetime of torment and after that (now and again) an unending length of time of torment? The main reason I can see is that a hellfire would be made so god can watch and appreciate the individuals who are enduring. Generally simply destroy them upon death (as a few religions permit). In fact, for a few religions, enduring is not made by the divine beings, but rather is a principal property of reality which all things persevere through (even divine beings) however it’s not everlasting (as in numerous organizations of Hinduism and some Buddhist ones, where damnation is similar to a late spring camp to prepare you to improve in the following incarnation).
In any case, notwithstanding for those religions that have inescapable the idea of an interminable discipline, or even any after-death discipline by any stretch of the imagination, the purpose behind torment in life could, best case scenario, be seen as a trial of humankind. However, why do that? Why not make them the way you need them? Why make them defective, with yearnings to be smothered? In the event that you need human souls to be with you in some heaven, then put them there in any case. Similarly as with hellfire, the main motivation behind why a divine being would allow human enduring is to view it or to utilize it to judge them – which is itself an issue.
4. What does God(s) escape giving people through and through freedom?
A few religions guarantee that their god(s) is omniscient, and consequently there is no spot for human through and through freedom. Choice is a deception for people, who are unequipped for seeing their future. In any case, for the applicable god(s), before the spirit is even tucked away in a body, to know whether that spirit will appreciate heaven or condemnation it makes one wonder of why experience the activity? Be that as it may, for those religions and precepts that grasp through and through freedom, people are allowed to take after god(s) or not, to their advantage or impairment. A few principles attempt to get around this by saying that god may know the result, yet he doesn’t meddle in a human’s decisions, so there is both omniscience and through and through freedom. Apparently, this implies god is then not dynamic in human undertakings, kind of like the missing watchmaker of eighteenth Century European thought.
In any occasion, isn’t giving human’s choice kind of like betting? Every human soul is a move of the shakers. How about we check whether this one goes to paradise or blazes everlastingly in damnation. How about we check whether this one lives on a yacht eating caviar and getting a charge out of the considerable number of erotic delights that cash can purchase, while that one passes on as a tyke in repulsive desolation from malady and unhealthiness – with the previous going to interminable euphoria and the later continuing for increasingly and more terrible misery, all on account of what they were sufficiently blessed to have accepted. Unless you concur with the Zoroastrians and Norse that there is a reason for people in some future perfect fight, then what is the point? It just appears like betting to me, an oddity about the obscure future. Human souls as game for an exhausted heavenliness.
5. Why make human souls interminable?
In case you’re divine and interminable and all capable, why do you have to make something else everlasting? What might be the reason? Most human religions have had divine beings with families and companions who are likewise divine. The grand court looks astoundingly like the royal court on earth, with jealousies and issues and sensualities, apprehensions, infuriates and craves all like those of delicate people. Be that as it may, different religions strip their god(s) of these physical feelings, and regard them as past human origination as far as their inspirations and goals. For some religions, particularly tribal ones, regardless of the fact that divine beings made people, the component of a spirit is frequently an uncreated component of life or cognizance that is uncreated by the divine beings. Numerous religions saturated creatures with this everlasting flash and in addition individuals.
However, accepting that an everlasting soul is not seen as an uncontrolled component of reality inside of which the god(s) work, then why make something like this? Particularly if the greater part of them are bound for interminable discipline? In case you’re a forlorn perfect being, you make holy messengers. I’ll take a few Apsaras, please – Buddhist/Hindu Angels are soooo vastly improved than the exhausting sword wielding, plague dispersing blessed messengers of the monotheisms. That is to say, don’t the blessed messengers in all their differences sufficiently offer amusement? Why make undying human souls? In the event that you need to make the most of their endeavors and check whether they can meet your charges, simply give them 1,000 years of paradise after life. Definitely that is sufficiently still of a motivating force, or even 10,000 or 100,000 years? Why time everlasting?
6. Why permit lack of awareness of yourself?
On the off chance that you were god, and you needed to test individuals to check whether they lived by standards, wouldn’t it ensure that they knew what those guidelines were? In case you’re going to play an amusement, it just works if both sides know the principles and what conditions constitute a triumph or a disappointment. Presently a few religions don’t think along these lines. Numerous tribal religions just considered their convictions to apply to themselves and other individuals had different divine beings, or no divine beings. Today, Judaism and Shinto and numerous Native American religions fall into this classification. God is not by any means an all inclusive god, as he/she/they are fundamentally worried with only one tribe or gathering of individuals. In this way, the principles apply to them and not as a matter of course to others. These religions don’t have a tendency to convert.
Hinduism and Chinese people religions fall somewhere in the center, as they truly have never added to a predictable mentality towards the individuals who don’t take after their confidence. For Hinduism, the conviction is plainly that all people, and creatures so far as that is concerned, are a piece of the experience of resurrection. However, comparing the position of outsiders into the idea of the standing framework has been loaded with conflicting positions. For Chinese society religions, including a few components of Taoism, you don’t have to trust inasmuch as you make the right appeasements. At the end of the day, they will acknowledge offerings from and answer the requests to God of anybody. A number of the world’s remaining society religions are comparable. Divine beings in these religions are more inspired by the outward indications of commitment or penance than with perusing the psyches of people (conventional Judaism is all that much in this primitive vein too, simply take a gander at the pages of portrayals on the best way to make penances, how to dress, what to eat, when to work, and so forth.).
Be that as it may, in the event that you were god, wouldn’t you need everybody to know? Why shroud yourself for a large portion of mankind’s history and after that just make yourself known one time in one spot to one gathering or individuals or even only one person? Zoroaster and Muhammad fall into this classification. Judaism used to attribute its Torah to be the works of small time, Moses (who, in any event in light of his portrayal in the Torah, is plainly anecdotal). What is the explanation behind the unobtrusiveness? Particularly when individuals’ wellbeing and maybe even interminable life is at danger, why not get the word out? Why sentence billions of individuals to perpetual torment just in light of the fact that they never knew about you? What is the rationale in this? Perhaps there are a few individuals you simply don’t care for? Is god a supremacist? Did he neglect to tell other people since he didn’t care for them? Since they weren’t sufficiently commendable? On the other hand would it say it was only too far to go to Australia?
There are more than 6, I know. What ones have you utilized that have been successful with devotees?