Debunking Christianity? It's actually quite as simple as asking "why?"

[Boris Spacek]

It's really just as simple as proposing the question "Why?" Such as: When "god" was making us, WHY would he even implant the ability to be violent? WHY even create such a thing as war, poverty, murder, rape, etc. ?? WHY sacrifice your son to cleanse a retched people, when you could've just created a perfect people in the first place?

Permit me to attempt to provide an answer through my reworking of Christian doctrines:

Let's say you were an all-powerful deity--not necessarily the Christian God--and you had an interest in creating one of Plato's Forms: say apricotness. You couldn't really do such a thing without creating the ante-form, the lack of apricotness, could you? Whether the lack of one form is a valid form itself, we'll leave aside for now. At least we know that, having created space in which an apricot could reside (why not make the matter while at it), it is necessary that the lack of apricot is an imaginable thing, and future minions might declare, "I'm an Apricotist," or "I'm a Sinapricotist." My theory about evil is that it is simply the absence of righteousness; when God established righteousness ("light", or "Lo, that's good!") his act of creation necessitated the lack of the thing he created, whence darkness. God also decided early on to represent all that was righteous, making righteousness Godliness and wickedness Godlessness. When God established what was with him, as opposed to what was without him, he established Heaven and Hell (or void or something dank and gloomy).

Now I suppose the violence you speak of was necessary to hunt animals during our prelapsarian days (but only for Christians who don't subscribe to the view that Adam and Eve were vegetarians--I haven't made up my mind on that yet), but the evils of war, poverty, murder, and rape are simply the result of not choosing God. Furthermore, the creation of humankind, although admittedly brought about by a bewildering number of factors according to Christian doctrine alone, is probably best seen as a grand experiment--much like in the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy--and as far as we humans (well, Christians) can surmise (let alone the mice for now) the test is whether humans can make good come of evil. The initial test, which was whether humans would steadfastly choose God, when given the free will to choose either Godliness or Godlessness, resulted in the shameful and embarassing moments in Genesis in which we chose evil over Godliness and God deciding, rather than aborting his plan, to let his very complex set up run on for the time we've come to know as history and existence. So, far from creating evils with which to trap man in the mire of wickedness, He established good and then tried to see if agents of free will would make the same decision He did. In fact, he went one step further and sent his Son to encourage the agents to choose as He did, skewing his results, but opening up new avenues of research.

I hope that conveys my point and exposes you to an answer that is not everyday. As for your second question, why send your Son to die on the Cross, well, I haven't exactly come to grips with that issue, I suppose because I never bothered to question it. My attitude towards the passion and death has simply been gratitude at having a glimpse into the mind of the Christian God through the life of Jesus Christ. But, yes indeed, why send him tens of thousands of years after The Fall? I guess it just felt right.

Thanks for the challenge.
-Boris