Baskadia

In-between Religion, Atheism and Thereabouts

This existence is, with certitude and upon solemn contemplation, a mere twofold milieu wherein irreconcilable readings of it are ubiquitous and in a ceaseless battle for supremacy ad infinitum. A faction holds the view that life is exclusively lived and experienced in order to attain the chief ultimate aim, that is, worshipping a god singled out amongst a plethora of other gods, and this deity is usually predicated on monotheism, particularly Abrahamic religions.

This stance, by and large, abounds with inexhaustible spirituality and intellectual idleness in that the adherents are imbued with a sense of purpose, but they are simultaneously plagued or, in fact, blessed with satisfactory answers to existentialist inquiries that torment and bombard the heart of those to whom the title of the truth seekers is aptly and with merit applicable, agnostics and atheists, along with theists extensively. However, by categorizing non-believers as so is not tantamount to positing that believers are not erudition seekers, but in many instances believers affiliate to a certain religion by a leap of faith with an arguable scrutiny and probing, therefore a religious person by heredity is not on a par with the one who embraced a faith based on meticulous efforts put forth over a considerable amount of time, namely years of intellectual labour performed so as not to elude triumph, soothing the existence predicament coerced upon all living entities.

A religious person is psychologically more resilient by dint of the advantage of possessing a purpose to his end a myriad of lives have been devoted since the inception and emergence of both monotheism and polytheism. This raison d'être constitutes a lighthouse that escorts to the sound path embodied in anything germane to goodness, and it is worthy of adherence as a result. This religious cause is replete within religions  and is foregrounded as the driving motor behind the establishment of innumerable temples, churches and mosques subsequently. 

It is undisputed and blatant that the encompassing majority of religions are established to serve a locus of exceedingly paramount influence epitomized in prostrating and approaching God or gods with copious reverence and acceptance, lest the ominous consequences befall them. Accordingly, there must be a minute description of that or those gods. For instance, Allah, in the perspective of atheists, is portrayed with relative dichotomy. At times, Allah is all-forgiving, and other times a bloodthirsty vindicator. This latter sentence sheds light on the truth that gods are drawn in human-like picture, encapsulating all the contradictory sides of the human psyche. This aforementioned position is vehemently espoused by the so-called atheists. The profile of certain deities, be it ancestral or Abrahamic, are forged and construed according to the authoritative minority which sustains its sovereignty by alleging to be the sole veritable source of ineffably unerring readings and revelations.

To resume unveiling the purportedly sacred shroud of Gods, one can state confidently that a human, with humble thinking, reflection and compassion, can render this existence a place teeming with goodness simply by eradicating the obnoxious rules of nature, specifically those concerning creatures forced to devour each other for survival, albeit this thoroughly utopian dream is out of reach and indeed elusive. This point is heavily postulated by some anti-religion advocates. Evil is, calamitously, the deterring agent that robs some of declaring their faith in the existence God. 

 In making essays or attempts to compile and glean the shortcomings of the belief in God, an entity with no trace or parcel of evilness, the result is a litany  of arguments that vehemently and logically contravene God’s existence, say the atheists.

 God exists based on horrifying terms, that is, God is not perfect, but an entity with its fair share of wickedness, and thereby all flaws are justifiable. The underlying defect that contradicts the supposed goodness of god is why didn’t he spare us the hardships of life by letting us live in heaven, not exiling us into earth?

 Atheism is the immediately definitive response to the irremediable bleakness of life. This antonym of theism is currently enjoying an enormous appeal generated somewhat from its gratification of the itching question of why there is evil, whereas there is God.

With the infinite passage of time, a multitude of philosophies that trigger the inherent existence related-conundrums, have arisen in the hope of alleviating the dilemma besetting the existent. Of these courageous philosophies, the chief ones are existentialism, absurdism and nihilism that spearhead the movement. These doctrines channel their frustration into substantially pessimistic undertakings.

 In being objective, one is obliged to state that the belief in god is equally justifiable and logical. The argument that strongly upholds the afterlife and the realness of God is the deluge of near death experiences that are universally akin to each other regardless of the different cultures and races. This point is corroborated by a dozen of scientists and people of all walks of life that have undergone this amazingly immersive experience which radically transformed their outlook on life for the better. Adding to this, The coining of the term paranormal unambiguously designates the actuality of  a nonphysical realm of insatiable intrigue.

Predicating on the premises and beliefs internalized by theists, the evils that cause the embittered moral of the atheist are issued predominantly from the fact that earth is merely mundane and a transient domicile doomed to finity, extinguishment and end, whereas the antithesis, heaven, is the transcending place incomparable to this downgraded earthly existence. In elaborating densely, evil is resulted relatively from the agency of humans and, in general, the required inner working mechanisms of nature. Put plainly, this earth is a place wherein one strives in the process regarding the cleansing from sins and wrongdoings for the embetterment of one's underlying, all-encompassing portrait determining his absolute destination in the incessantly approaching afterlife.  This is the quintessential retort uttered by the theist upon being asked questions in affinity to the emphatically bewildering dichotomy of evil  and good.

Touching on the point that god is drawn in an image akin to the human psyche, it is readily refutable because we, humans, are endowed with a limited faculty of understanding in that we compare to fathom and are invariably seeking to relate, thereby the recourse to comparing is solely an upshot of our innate desire to engage by any means. The veritable detailed description of God negates and is the opposite of all the faults marring the human attitude and thinking, say the theists.

Conclusively, theist or atheist are equally in a trek inevitably bound to cease abruptly in searching for the coveted truth. Furthermore, each one is convinced by their viewpoint for which they surely must have turned pages and asked questions assiduously.

As a sufficient sealing, life is considerably enjoyable in the middle, being kind to others, being altruistic and compassionate and being devoid of any unnecessary evilness. In certainty, The good is always met with the good, whether it is in this mundane life or in the afterlife. Life is a mere evanescent period, and awaiting ethically and spiritually the end coupled with embracing the afterlife is the right choice.