Atheist's Questions, Possible Answers

I probably have too much ego over my theological prowess, but given how bad most people are at it, and how rarely anyone has any grasp of it, it is hard not to believe it must be very difficult. 

Let's move down this list. Here's how God MIGHT answer: 

"I didn't do any of those things, you are confusing people's thoughts ABOUT me with what I really am. I'm not a fundamentalist...why are you?"

"You need to look up the word 'inspire'...inspiration is not control. BTW my book has multiple accounts of Creation and only one says the things you talk about."

"The purpose and function of faith are perfectly explained in the book MYSTERY WITHOUT MAGIC, you should read it. Your own Immanuel Kant answered this pretty well, too...Manny's a great guy."

"My actions resulted in a hell of a supernova yesterday...if that isn't grandiose, I don't know what is. The distinction between the natural and supernatural was invented by humans, and that only recently."

"I think you need to get clear about what metaphysics is all about."

"There are tons of studies that show prayer is very effective at doing what I intend it to do: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-find-one-source-of-prayers-power/"

"I wouldn't, I don't, I died on a cross to keep that from ever happening"

"They were chosen for a specific job, not to be better, just set apart."

"I didn't, freedom made evil possible, but without it nothing could exist at all. Creation was a risk. One worth taking, though."

"Because I am as I do, I am the act of creating."

Reason & Morality

The idea that "reason" gives us unaided access to morality has the potential to lead to as dangerous a fervor as the most fundamentalist religiosity. It gives the air of scientific certainty to what remains a human, fallible process in often murky waters. Any ethical philosophy that fails to admit that we are limited, and morally broken creatures groping in the darkness is bound for disillusionment or destructive ends. Mao and Stalin thought they had discovered the truth of what was good and right, by unaided reason. Do we need religion to have morality? No. But it is not clear to me that irreligious moral philosophy has adequate metaphysical girth to maintain sufficient existential weight. And it seems clear that ANY morality capable of both motivating while also discomforting is going to be no more certain nor free from corruptibility than any religion or religious ethical philosophy.