Damien Sullivan wrote: On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:05:36PM -0500, Peter H. Granzeau wrote: >> I went hunting once for a word to describe lack of belief in any Deity >> (including active non-belief in a Deith) and failed miserably. I always >"godless" >> need something that not only says "there is no God", but says, "and I don't >> care if there is one or not". >"apatheist" >While I understand David's denial of a lack of interest in the matter, it's >also nice to be able to say "go away, I don't care". A Gordian knot approach. >After all, a Great Sky Father who doesn't _do anything_ needn't be of that >much concern, really. And if He did something noticeable, then we wouldn't be >arguing over His existence... I think one of my main problems with modern religions, esp. those of "The Book" (ie: those with a history of non-tolerance in the form of crusades/jihads and inquisitions) is the idea of a male creator. It seems like such an obvious co-opting of power from the myriad female fertility gods of antiquity. The vengeful desert god of the Old Testament seems logical - male, unrelenting and without mercy, whereas the god of the new law, the New Testament, seems to have the qualities of those earlier feminine gods. It's like a rival broadcasting company contriving a white Oprah. A forgiving male god will appeal to a larger audience, and more importantly, an audience that holds most of the power in the world. And Jesus laid the smackdown when necessary - exactly what you want in a ruler - justice and strength to free the oppressed, and mercy for the masses. So while I cannot prove that there is or is not a god, I can look at the evolution of Christianity (what happened to all those folks who went to Hell for eating meat on Sundays(?) now that it is no longer an imperil-your-soul sin?) and see how it responded to the needs of the time, and think to myself, wow, good PR, excellent timing - who's in charge of this company? How do I buy stock?