“Human stupidity” is tool A failing to complete task B.
Tool A can be lust, anger, desire, anything. Tool A can make a gun to defend or inhance itself, then destroy what it didn’t ever have to make trouble with in the first place.
God A can give soul A “meaning” and “hope”, but at the same time, God A does not undo problem B, and God A treats the symptem, not the cause.
God A can forgive your sin. If you killed someone, God A could forgive your action, but God A could not solve the problem – who you killed is still dead.
Genius A can know fact A, but then still dies due to problem B, and all of what he is and knows is then lost, unless he wrote a part of it down.
Humans are bio-machines that have a certian range of capability to remedy a certain range of tasks, sometimes. Humans begin do push the limits when they try to find “the higher/highest meaning”; they fail every time, but they mannage to satisfy themselves and others a bit…
The unborn is subjective. The born and existent is the objective.
Humans can output both of these; these are A and B of concept…
But what created the unborn, which optionally existed?
Could it be… random?
If so, then I suppose that is why you cannot ever predict the exact roll of the dice, and all unknowables are actually “randoms”.
But the origin of the universe and the ultimate “meaning” of life, isn’t that a random? I would say so. I would say life on earth doesn’t have one united meaning, because side A destroys side B sometimes. I say that matter, energy, organisms, planets and universes each have their own “meaning” and some of these are capable of effecting others, thus their “meaning” changes.
In some ways, trying not to be ‘untrue’ is like trying not to breath. I’ve seen far too much “spirituality” to defend it and give it a collective, unified “meaning” or defence.
Arguing about what “God” is is like arguing about which sexual position is best.
…It really is…
So then it becomes a question of mechanics. Why does A want B? Patterns are constructed, predicitons and expectations form, after “fact” and human reaction to “fact”/“preception” combine and “opinion” is born.
Here’s a great one for you:
The part of your brain that believes in God and feels God can be removed.
If the ability to believe or understand A was removed in all of the species, then A would no longer exist to them, no matter if it really did exist or not.
Belief can also be inborn, in the form of instinct.
Again, if the universe is infinite, then anything you want or say exists and can be found somewhere at some time, so then the question shifts FROM “TRUTH” AND “EXISTENCE” right onto DESIRE, INBORN INSTINCT, AND EXTERNAL INFLUANCE. Not-so-suddenly, belief and opinion becomes an optional means to an end, and each belief brings different fruitage.
Once everything is “true”, then we see that what is “most true” or “most right” is also “most satisfying” or “most desired”. Would you believe the destruction of the entire earth is the “most evil thing that could ever happen”? Then you must want the opposite. Our desire, belief or opinion, once forged by the order of instinct and memories, becomes the ‘belief’ that we find ‘support’ for, as we defend what we want with A or B.
So now, perhaps we judge how good any action, feeling, belief, theory or idea is only by its effects upon us. Human truth is human desire.
Does “God” want us to die, suffer, be ignored, and be forgotten?
Or does “God” want the opposite?
Or do we want the opposite of what REALLY IS?
When the fundamentalists believe God is perfect and wants A, they then set their own beliefs on a throne of perfection as soon as their own beliefs run in harmony with “the will of God”. Firstly, strange how such a pathetic God cannot act but still wants. Secondly, this is the arrogance, hidden within “humility” – within the religious fundamentalist. Third:
If we didn’t believe something was meant to be, would we try to make it happen?
All gods are false, and people do their best to make their gods real.