Religion: retardation or brainwashing?

No mentally competent person can honestly believe that an omnipotent, omniscient being created a deeply flawed world we are in, cared about it, yet left it filled with what it considers to be evil.

There is a possibility that otherwise sane person might suppress his judgment and avoid thinking about religion in a way that could break the idiotic delusion that is God.
This would prevent him from realizing how retarded the whole idea is.

But then again - is someone suppressing their sane evaluation of idiocy of religion really only misguided?
Does intentionally acting like a retard while believing things that only a retard would believe really all that different from actual retardation?

Note that the above description covers all religions with omniscient, omnipotent beings who have non-zero care about the world.
A religion that presents a weak god, who is just a powerful scientific alien or a wizard limited by mana, is actually far more sensible than the mental garbage that is modern monotheism.
Actually idiotic beliefs of christians, muslims, jews and possibly other religions are obviously not just brainwashing. To support ideas such as fetal personhood, shroud of Turin, homosexuality being an abomination, suffering being better than nonexistence, indivisible immortal soul possessed only by humans, or 6 day creation, one HAS to be retarded and incapable of reason. Not misguided, not just plain wrong, but actually mentally deficient.

``atheist'' liberals worship social justice
instead of a person, they worship a political ideology
it's not that different, if you think about

Would the world be any less deeply flawed if everyone got exactly what they wanted?
The world is what it is, if god created it then that's what he did, it doesn't mean he dictates everything that happens

Fuck off frozenanus you gay pagan

It isn't automatically the manufacturers fault if you crash a car

>>5
It proves with 100% certainty that the manufacturer must either not know of all the possible usages, not be able to prevent crashes, or consider crashes an intended feature of the product.
If an omniscient, omnipotent being created a world, it would be free of what it considers evil. No excuse like "muh devil" and "muh free will" works against this, since devil isn't omnipotent and "free will" is already constrained heavily and thus not free by any means.

for religion, there are two possibilities (assuming you're not an atheist):
1.) god is all-power and all-knowing (seems unlikely in my opinion)
2.) god has the ability to make things, such as our universe, but doesn't have the ability to do 100% of everything -- think of god as like a programmer, and our universe is his simulation that he programmed, but outside of this universe he is powerless, among other beings on the same plane as him

I can make a Sims game, where I make towns and characters and such. But just because I can control a limited simulation of lower beings like that doesn't mean I can do any old random thing.

Humans can clone goats. Are we god to goats? Well, we're not capable of doing everything. Just some things.

When Conway designed Conway's Game of Life, he only made the simple rules for particle interaction. He did not design all the emergent properties. But there are complex things that happen in the game that he did not intend and has no control over.

I think that whatever made us might not actually be omniscient or omnipotent. They simply had the ability to create our universe.

>>7

1.) god is all-power and all-knowing (seems unlikely in my opinion)

If you add "and wants the world to be good" to it, this can't be unlikely "in opinion" and becomes impossible as a fact, with one exception being that it considers the world to be infinitely good and impossible to improve in any way.

Retards do massive amounts of mental gymnastics to convince themselves that there is a being who could improve the world with zero effort, knows exactly how and where, wants the world to be improved, but doesn't.

>>6
Not to mention, an omnipotent being such as "God" should be able to make a flawless world while also maintaining our free will. I mean, does he not have the power or ability to do that? Because if not, this God isn't omnipotent.

If God is limitless and exists, he/she would've made the perfect world while simultaneously giving us an unflawed free will.

I don't mind people believing what they want. But if they try and feed me that horse shit like I'm subpar to them, they can eat my atheist dick.

I want my code to be good. I want to have complete control over my software. I want it to be perfect. But alas, I am an imperfect programmer, so I create imperfect code, and it doesn't always turn out exactly the way I wanted it to.

Have you ever considered that maybe god is like a programmer?

Programmers can create things, but those things they create are flawed. In the case of things like neural networks, they can have a mind of their own too, doing something you don't want them to (until you revert to a previous commit and make some changes and recompile and start it all over again -- the big bang, more like the big compile).

>>10
If you create an imperfect creation, you aren't perfect. Deists who teach God as a perfect, flawless being fail to realize that if he's responsible for a flawed creation, he can't be perfect. Either he's a lazy asshole, or he's righteous and imperfect. No in between.

>>11

If you create an imperfect creation, you aren't perfect.

You must be retarded if you think I implied anything else.

That's the point! Just because something makes something else doesn't mean they're perfect. The idea of a creator doesn't mean they have to be perfect and omniscient and omnipotent. All they need is the ability to make something.

>>12
So you admit this God isn't perfect and all powerful? Thanks, that'll be all.

>>12
You must be retarded if you somehow missed the part where they clearly specified they were talking about "Deists who teach God as a perfect, flawless being". Learn to read, you dumbass.

>>13
I never said he was, dipshit!
>>14
That's not what other posts were about. Who gives a shit?

>>15
You replied to a comment that was talking about that. It said so in the body. How are you this retarded? Did God make you this way?

Do athiests really believe that they don't believe anything?

checkmate atheists

Mental competence as described by OP seems limited to efficiency and observation. It doesn't take into consideration ethics and wisdom which is vital to human understanding. Futuristic governments such as communism and fascism become despotic failures because of their denial to identify that humans need mysticism and curiosity for social and independent regulation. Religion also offers itself its opportunities to be faithful to all levels of intelligence rather than restricting itself. It is a dominant form of philosophy and life for very strong reasons.

>>17
By definition, they believe in the lack of a sentient creator.

>>18
You can give people mysticism and other insanities without building a giant tower of bullshit to house and lobby for irrational beliefs.
Organized religion always turns out to be cancer, just like the fascism and communism you mentioned. The only reason it hasn't destroyed the world is that even normies realized it's a good idea to push religion away from government.