Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


MAYBE EVIL ALLOWS FOR GOD'S EXISTENCE BUT IS NOT EVIDENCE FOR GOD?

In religion God is the pure good and the source of all good.

Evil is seen as a good that is faulty and thus it is not a thing that is created.

Evil is a word intended to provoke nausea and revulsion.

As we will see that is a hate spreading tactic for the revulsion does not fit what people say evil is.

The fact is that religion or not, people find certain actions and non-actions disgusting. The wife hates her husband lying to her.

Religion says that atheists if they say there is no God cannot account for good or what good means. They end up with a problem of good. So evil is evidence or proof for God. This is a bigger claim than saying evil does not rule out God. It is demonising evil and then using what you demonise to make a case for God. If God needs you to do that then he is not so good after all!

They say evil is evidence for God for evil is a falling short of what God wants and is an abused good.

If you say it is not evidence and evil just allows for God then what? You are denying that evil is what the God doctrine implies it is. Calling it a lack implies it is a lack of God so that is calling it evidence for God. You are calling evil real and not just a lack so how you can you say there is a God when he must have made evil?

We see that the problem of evil and the problem of good are two sides of the same coin for the believer in God.

We see that the notion that evil allows for God but is not evidence makes evil and good two sides of the same coin. That makes God useless as a morality inducing concept and being. To be ineffectual in such a big thing is to do harm.