I know this doesn't feel as rational as the Problem of Evil. But it is meant to address authoritarian religious theologies, which are all the rage right now, and have been for most of human history. But those past religions were allowed to enforce their dominance through, well, force. They had the goods to back up their claims. Christianity, as it stands in this moment, is trying (and failing) to straddle post-Enlightenment values (freedom, love, equality, reason) with an Edgelord God of the Past.
The Problem of Authoritah is designed to shine a light on those particular contradictions in a way that the Problem of Evil cannot.
Because authoritarian reasoning works differently than we are used to. The basis of the Problem of Evil makes a fundamental error. It assumes authoritarian adherents to religion are against "evil." They are, dear reader, not. But they are all *for* authority. And that is the lynchpin in their fragile Jenga tower.
If "might makes right," then why isn't the Almighty making Alrighty? That's the soft spot this line of thinking is meant to address. Whatever omnipotent God wants should be how it is, and if it isn't, then he's a big babypants who can't do what needs to be done.
"Well," they may think, "that's why we Christian Nationalists are trying to take everything over. To make way for God to return and rule in style the way it's meant to be..."
But then WHY does "omnipotent" GOD need their relatively weak-asses to do that for him? That sounds like cuck behavior to me. Either on the part of God or on the part of God's servants. Take your pick. He can't do it on his own. How very, very sad.
I'd be interested to see this one brought up at a theism debate or on one of these videos or podcasts. That's an experiment I'd bring my biggest popcorn for.
3/3
#atheism #ReligiousTrauma #religion #exmo #exmormon #exvie #exvangelical #philosophy #psychology #AbuseCulture