Thursday, September 28, 2006

An Imaginary Conversation with God...

I got into a discussion on the existence of God over at Protein Wisdom. Jeff started it, sort of. He was responding to something I had said in another thread dismissing agnosticism in favor of atheism. After starting the thread, though, he disappeared and the discussion devolved into atheism vs. theism. That's nearly always a waste of time, but once I was involved in the discussion, it was difficult to resist going back. I finally got a visit from the Guy Upstairs, who convinced me to stop banging my head against a wall:

Me: (Typing.)

God: (Pops in and begins reading over my shoulder.)

God: Do you really think you're going to convince anyone?

Me: It could happen.

God: Has it ever worked before?

Me: There was that one guy…


Me: (Typing.)

God: Wasn't he gay?

Me: Well, yeah, as it turned out, he was, but what does that--

God: Leviticus.

Me: What do you mean?

God: The whole stoning thing.

Me: Wouldn't that just make him alter his behavior?

God: You might think so, but it doesn't work that way. People find the morality that works for them, and then they look for a justification. That's where I come in--or not.

Me: So you're saying that the people who believe in you only do so because you give them a reason to live the way they think is right?

God: Sure. Well, that and because they're afraid of dying. Believing they're going to be with me afterwards means they don't have to worry about that. They sleep better.

Me: So, what? Are you saying I'm a bad person because I'm trying to get them to face reality?

God: No, I'm saying that you're pissing into the wind.

Me: Oh.

Me: You know, it's not like you're doing them any favors. I mean, the first half of the Bible is devoted to the violent history of a bunch of religious fanatics, and the second half is devoted to the sad history of a guy whose example teaches people that dying for the sins of others is the most noble thing they can do.

God: What, you don't think I wrote that, do you? The slaughters, the stonings, letting my kid get nailed to a cross...?

Me: That's not yours? Which book did you write then?

God: I wrote a book of poetry once, but I couldn't get anyone to publish it.

Me: Oh.

God: You want to hear some of it?

Me: Umm, well… I was going to finish typing this post.

God: Not giving up yet?

Me: No. There was that one guy…

God: Yeah…

Me: (Typing.)

God: Didn't he become a radical subjectivist?

Me: *Sigh* (*right click *select all *delete)

God: Want to go get a beer?

Me: Sure.

God: Cool.

Me: Hey, did you use the word "pissing"?

God: I invented pissing. Get over it.


Steven Brockerman, MS said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Steven Brockerman, MS said...

In the beginning, Man created God. From this eventually came the concept of Hell and that to avoid it, Man must treat life as a vale of tears and misery.

The sequence is not coincidental.

I do not think it is death the theist truly fears. I think it is a happiness.

Happiness is hard; it is demanding; it requires effort; happiness is achieved by acting virtuously.

Suffering requires nothing save passive resignation, allowing one the claim of virtue without really ever having to practice it.

Ask of men anything, except that they achieve happiness. For that, they will damn you and burn you at the stake. And count themselves noble for doing so.

Excellent post.

The Sanity Inspector said...

As for Protein Wisdom, I think I have an update on the outage.

Myrhaf said...

Your God seems like a nicer fellow than the one in the Old Testament.

Ardsgaine said...

I modeled him on George Burns.

Graeme McMasters said...

Ignorant beyond belief, and not terribly original. It would be helpful for you, I think, to study a bit of basic theology in order to understand - at least on a basic level - that which you attempt to criticise.


Ardsgaine said...

It would be helpful for you to, first of all, learn the difference between a humorous post and an argument; and, second of all, learn to formulate your own arguments if you want to object to someone else's opinions in an intelligent manner.

Just out of curiosity, do you believe that someone has to have read Das Kapital in order to reject communism? Cause I think that a person of basic intelligence without reading much on the subject ought to be able to look at the idea underlying communism and see that it's evil. Likewise, I don't think it takes a master's degree in theology to look at the idea of faith and conclude that belief without evidence is irrational.

If a proper understanding of these things was only available to the abundantly educated, I think we would be in a lot more trouble than we are.