The contempt that the religions of the afterworld hold for the mundane is certainly no secret. Adherents of such systems of belief are instructed to decry their own natural inclinations and desires in favor of prostration before a holy book and the being supposedly behind it. Human beings, it is said, are naturally evil and motivated toward selfishness and weakness of will. Of course I will not argue against the first accusation, although selfishness is unavoidable and in many cases unworthy of denigration. As for weakness, the term is entirely subjective when used int his context. While a religious person might name their fellows weak for fulfilling desires, it could be said that the religious person is simply too weak to follow suit, and uses his faith as a shroud for his frailty. In any case, it is said by the religious cults, particularly Christianity, that humans, because of the Fall, cannot trust their natural instinct since it leads only to sin and not to goodness.
The trouble with such a claim is that there is no escape from such ingrained love of sin and evil that human beings supposedly possess.This poses a very serious question for Christianity: is the desire of a Christian to follow God not the fervent yearning of a sinful creature who cannot know good? Is even the desire to follow God a misstep? How could it not be, given that every impulse of the human mind is purportedly tainted with evil? Surely even the most devout of believers are doing nothing more than sublimating their sinful and worldly lusts.
The response from Christians will surely be that there is a loophole in the system, and the loophole is easy enough to guess. They will say that the decision of the faithful to follow God is informed not by instinct, but by the divine grace and will of God himself. This only raises further questions though. If one is a Calvinist or likeminded to one, then the obvious problems of predestination, freewill, and grace that are raised by the claim that God elevates some and not others are not entirely off-putting. For anyone else the logical implications of these ideas are horrific, God simply chooses to rescue some for no reason other than his incomprehensible will?
Still, the problem of predestination does not stand alone as a strange consequence of this claim that the desire to follow God is not derived from the minds of men. If we suppose that the claim is true, then there is a serious issue to be addressed. This issue is that the idea is simply nonsensical since human choice must be involved at some point in the process of salvation, otherwise the beliefs of mainstream Christianity at least are rendered impotent. If a person does not choose whether or not to follow Christ, then aside from problems of freewill, all the preachings and rantings of the churches are utterly pointless since the choice cannot be made by men no matter how many times they hear the ostensibly true word of the gospels.
If, on the other hand, human beings necessarily choose for themselves whether or not to heed the divine call of God, then a very human and very Fallen mind is involved in the process of salvation, again raising the question of whether the desire to follow God is any less sinful and vile than anything else chosen by men.
To be succinct, either the choice belongs to man or it does not. If it does not, then the abomination of reality is that humans are born unable to choose any path to salvation; Fate is arbitrarily doled out by the omnipotent. If the choice does belong to men, then what separates the desire to follow God from the desire to blaspheme against Him in terms of the sinful origins of each?