religion...

WARNING: The following contains a complete lack of transition between topics, my apologies.

Epicurus said, and this isn’t an exact quote: If God cannot prevent pain and suffering, then he isn’t omnipotent; If He can prevent it and doesn’t, then he’s malevolent. So if he's malevolent and not omnipitant, why call him god?

I’m having trouble getting past this little ‘speed bump’

I honestly cant believe that the answers to all my questions are waiting for me in the afterlife, or more specifically Heaven. If I’m competent enough to develop the question then I should be qualified to hear the answer. If I can think it then I should also be able to answer it, none of this “ask God when you see him” bullshit. These answers are essential to make any sort of a logical decision, why deprive me of them?

Another question I can’t answer is how remarkably different God seems between the old and new testaments, its almost like he converted to a much less orthodox denomination of himself. I find that the old testament shares some similarities with the coulture of the time; stern, violent, threatening, tyrannical. The New Testament almost seems like someone found the old stuff and toned it down a bit, didn’t make you castrate your enemies or wander the desert.

As a matter of fact, the Bible we all know and love TODAY was in fact constructed and organized not by the religious devout or Hebrew scholars but by Romans under Constantine in the Council of Nicaea in AD 325. Is it possible that God really took over the minds of these men to construct the one true book that would lead his chosen? We can totally trust that everything in there is all God, absolutely everything?

…And the hypothetical that God influenced the thoughts or actions of an individual I find hard to believe because we as human beings are completely free-willed, made so by God (accordingly). They told me in church that the reason God made us free-willed is because any worship received otherwise didn’t count, where’s the glory in being the idol of a robot after all? So in order for God to influence our actions he’d have to be crossing the boundary, right?

There’s a verse in exodus: “ Although Moses and Aaron did these miracles in Pharaoh’s presence, the LORD hardened his heart so he wouldn’t let the Israelites leave the country.” (Exodus 11:10 NLV) In this single act of meddling, God’s hand was “forced” to kill all the newborn sons of Egypt. Pharaoh should have just let those people go, wait…did he even have a choice?

I also find the need for a savior sorta far-fetched and somewhat masochistic on the creators part. Why would he purposefully create an entire planet full of people that weren’t good enough to get into heaven on their own and instead must depend on the blood of a sacrifice? Why wouldn’t he just design things to work differently, maybe prevent the death of your son so much? It’s just not efficient.

I also find Jesus’ prerequisites for being messiah unoriginal and completely similar to every other messiah prospect from before and after his time. Virgin birth? Walk on water? The ability to bring the dead back to life? There were so many individuals that claimed the exact same properties. I understand that if you believe Jesus was God then he really could do these things, but why would he do these certain things if they were so not out of the ordinary? It would be like Steve Jobs releasing the iPod after every competitor already had. His product wouldn’t make a ripple, so why did Jesus’?

Im really not trying to be blasphemous, but its kinda insulting to think you believe in the one true religion when its shares so many qualities and characteristics with other 'heathenish' ones.

I’m sorry, these are just some questions that have been bugging me, feel free to answer them ☺

i also apologize for the sloppy writing, call it a rough draft