Eternal Blah-blah

Steve

Question from a follower, "Is it better to believe in no god or a benevolent false god?"

Strictly answering the question, it's better to believe in no God than a Non Existent Benevolent One. It would be interesting to see if people respond to this question as an attack on his or her faith and choose to be offended rather than choose between the two choice given. Anyways, for the Christians who read this, the Hindus may come to mind since their concept of God is so vastly different from that of the Christian faith. Perhaps these two examples of vastly different religions see the other as illogical. For the agnostic, the question isn't 'which God to believe in' rather 'does god really exist.' A strictly logical, zero based thinker will believe according to what he or she feels is true. According to the philosopher Brian Johnson, "Ask yourself the following question, 'Knowing what I know now, would I have gotten involved in this relationship, this career/job, this project, whatever?!?' If the answer is 'No!' then get out of that situation as quickly as possible. That’s Zero-Based Thinking. ( "Zero based thinking" par. 1). If the answer is "yes" than keep doing and believing what ever you want. Of course this gets very complicated when considering all of life's many decisions decisions. The whole point is that a zero based thinker who sees insufficient evidence for God will not believe in God no matter how benevolent, almighty, loving or omnipotent God is reported to be. A zero based thinker can also acknowledge what he sees as evidence and then believe in God as long as thhe evidence is valid.

Source

Johnson, Brian. Brian Johnson's Philosopher Notes. http://www.philosophersnotes.com/idea/show/zero- based-thinking

Brandon's response:

Yes, a person believes what they are going to believe. The question seems irrelevant- people believe based on what they know- but I will not take the question as if your suggesting to change a persons mind (I very much believe in agency). Only worth while person is one that has purpose, goal seeking, or aim. If a person seeks after good=good! If you believe there is no consequence and therefore cruelty to others is a justified means to get ahead=bad! Even from a spiritual perspective: you are judge on what you did with your given knowledge. Should a person live a lie- no! I have meet a man that follows and practices the LDS faith, even though he is strongly agnostic (on the verge of atheist)- yet he wants his sons to be ordained to the priesthood, his daughters married in the temple; why? He still feels strongly that the rituals are good for them and if they develop a faith in Christ they will be better off (the real controversy is should he ordain his son himself?). Is this man going to hell? HELL no. Take what ever truth you have, what ever purpose you have and let it lead you to truth. My "T"ruth is a purpose in God, that is relative to my knowledge.
P.S. I wouldn't trust a religious person more then an atheist if that helps answer your question.

Steve's Response:

Your response is interesting but you didn't answer the question. My Initial response was a strict answer to the question "Is it better to believe in no God or a Benevolent false God?" How is the question irrelevant if could be seen as hypothetical, applicable to Agnostics and atheists, or even applicable to other Gods like Zues. Zeus is arguably a false god and I choose not to believe in him no matter how benevolent he is reported to be.