God is and has always been a crutch of mankind. Often He provides an
explanation to the questions that
vex us, a comfort for the emptiness that can fill us, a
justification to the
atrocities we commit, and above all else, a
model for our
behavior. Any who stray from His
flock are bound to come around sometime...especially when they stand before Him to be
judged.
If the followers of the
Judeo-Christian God are right in this, all mankind will be judged upon the
Apocalypse. At this time we will all be found either
worthy or
lacking, whereupon we will either
ascend to
Heaven or be cast into
Hell for all
eternity.
Well, as an
athiest, I'm curious...where's the third choice? If God's all about
freedom, including the freedom to
stray, why the
limitations? Those who don't subscribe to His
rules, or even His
existence, can't be held responsible for not
adhering to them, under the circumstances.
This is equivalent to
beating a stray dog for
begging. He doesn't know any better, and you have no
authority over him anyway. I know that one possible rebuttal to this argument is that athiests are rarely
ignorant of the rules of God, especially in
Western society, where those rules extend heavily into the
secular. I bring upon you then the scenario of the '
Good Athiest'. Suppose this individual acted in a
good and
positive fashion throughout his entire
life, not for the rewards of
Heaven, but rather in accordance his own
intrinsic moral code? Would this kindly
heathen be punished in the afterlife for his
heretical lifestyle?
(I'd love an actual canonized text reference for or against this point, but my religious texts are all at home, and I'm not.)
My personal beliefs, or lack thereof, must be obvious at this point, but I'm asking that all rebuttals hold to a secure foundation of logic, as I have aspired to here.