Compared to God: We Only have a Limited View

I had a discussion today with a Christian (now a few days ago) in which we discussed time and how god was not bound by its constraints. As obvious as this is to this person, that god isn’t bound by time, her conclusion left me a bit puzzled as to how she arrived at her ‘undenialable’ conclusion. In an effort to understand her position I asked, “Wait, how do you know god is not, as you say, bound by time?” She seemed to think my questioning into the reality of time and god was unworthy of any dignified answer for the only answer I received was an irritated reply, “Please! He’s god, he can do anything he wants!” Apparently, my question seemed juvenile to this lady. Though I could see the annoyance of my simple inquiry was building, I couldn’t help but to ask a few more. “Ok, so god isn’t bound by time because he is god. So why does god let bad things happen to innocent people, like children molestation and people’s mother killed, or 9/11?” Her reply was as expected, “I don’t know why. Sometimes bad things happen and we, as God’s children, can’t possibly understand God because we only have a limited view. We just have to trust God.”

I do not know how people can't see the inherent contradiction they exude with such explanations that snub away tangible, uncomfortable, immoral acts that happen to people under god's supposed omnipotent power and yet at the same time they know precisely how the unobservable science of God manifests itself invisibly...but apparently rendered obvious. How is it that of all the things 'god's children' possibly cannot know concerning god, like how he escapes the laws of physics, space, time, etc., people of faith 'just' automatically know? Yet, when it comes to actually physical observable matters and situations, like child molestation, the science of god and all of his previously known magnificent powers is suddenly lost on them? It seems convenient at these times to all of a sudden not know how God works, except to say that he has some 'unknowable plan' for which they KNOW is holy. I can only figure that the belief that God is all good, all powerful, all knowing, and everywhere makes the knowledge of situations like, again, child molestation quite uncomfortable for those believers to continue to swallow. That is, unless they can come up with an explanation that allows a good-god and child molestation to exist peacefully side by side.

The psychologist, Leon Festinger's, included the process that one’s cognition follows when one merges a belief that contradicts another belief into his widely accepted theory of Cognitive Dissonance. For example, the dissonance between the belief that god is all powerful and good and the belief that child molestation is bad/evil is healed, by the faithful, when they conclude that ‘god’s children only have a limited view’ disabling anybody to conclude that god may not be so good after all...or even doesn’t exist all together. That is, if you choose to believe the absolutely unverifiable resolution of the ‘limited view’ position.

The simple notion that we all have a limited view compared to god's is a contradictory statement in and of itself. If they truly believe they have a limited view, how do they even erect the ‘limited view’ belief? For, if they truly had a limited view how could they know for sure they don't have a limited view on having a limited view. As a matter of fact, if they have a limited view, how do they discern that god is good? Furthermore, how do they KNOW they even have a limited view?

The whole ‘limited view’ position begs a person not to think for themselves. For instance, would rapping a woman ever be moral? I’m sure that everyone reading this blog, religious or not, will maintain an absolute, “No,” to that question without hesitation. Though, I invite anyone reading to contradict me if someone feels otherwise. However, in all of our ‘limited view’ the ‘holy’ book by ‘God’ states in Deuteronomy 21: 11-14 :

11: And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife

12: Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;

13: And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.

14: And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.

Not only does god say it’s ok, but he makes it an act worthy of a month preparation ritual of humbling. Not only does this man get to rape her at his will, but desecrate her as well. Who cannot stand up and say that an act of this kind is not wrong in any given situation? I certainly can. Yet, were I to maintain a limited view on God then how could I possibly disagree with god’s own words. He is, after all, all good and knows more than me and my ‘limited view’. And to go ahead and refute the popular rebuttal that Jesus’ returned to abolished the old law I shall insert Matthew 5: 17-18 here:

17: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

18: I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Has anyone changed their mind that rape of a woman under any circumstance has changed yet? Even though god, supposedly himself, maintains that it is just fine to rape in time of war. Hey, a man has to satisfy himself somehow, right? Yet, I presume everyone remains disgusted with the idea of woman violence, especially under god’s name.

Still, had the Christian followers maintained a ‘limited view’ on this matter, would we still see these kinds of acts still happening today? I imagine some may disagree but I would like to remind people that atrocities still happen in the vain of those who fervently persist that the bible is an absolutely moral book for which one must read and follow. Immoral acts are endured everyday by homosexuals, atheists, women, African Americans, etc., because those who believe in the bible’s complete morality thrush it upon these people. Furthermore, the ‘we only have a limited view’ excuse exacerbates the problem of clear injustice retained by these people. The very idea that one only has a limited view compared to god’s, chokes any independent thought from his followers. And so it follows, those who desire power cannot preside over a people who freely express independence in their thinking and rationality.

Can people of any faith really not comprehend that their confident answers about god consist of absolutely no obtainable evidence and that the time their “I don’t knows” come rolling out of their mouth the “we can’t possibly understand god because of a limited view” notions are always correlated with actual observable happenings? Do they not see that making something up that is improvable bodes well to never having to withstand ever being proven wrong? Indeed, whatever one has made up to feed the dissonance in their head stands a good chance of keeping a delusion valid. I suppose that is why those with schizophrenia and other mental illness rarely come to the conclusion they are actually schizophrenic. They feel that the delusion, hallucination, etc. is actually happening; therefore, it is actually happening. I really don’t think most are daft enough not to grasp this concept. However, whether or not they want to grasp it, I think, holds the answer and is a whole other blog altogether ;)).