Friday, September 04, 2009


Today, my wife and I drove over to the Crescent City on the Northern California coast. Coming back along I-5, we passed a garage or shed with its back to the highway. On its surface in large letters, its owner had written: PRAISE GOD.

My wife and I laughed. Praise God. Is that the being who doomed the entire human race to die because they exercised the supposedly free will he'd given them to use in a free way? What's to praise? Seems he really didn't mean them to have free will except as limited by his king like orders. So they weren't actually free. So, for disobeying a little thing like eating and becoming as wise as god imagined he was wise, this god fellow murders every human being on earth, constantly, each and every day. Then, as atonement for his unrelieved cruelty toward the human race, he makes it up by killing his own son. That's right, two wrongs somehow make a right. 

Then there's another piece of insanity in that whole scenario. As I recall, this hypothetical superbeing was afraid that his human slaves would eat of the tree of life and have eternal life. Now wait a minute. I thought these human being already had eternal life. That's why god decided that they must die, that he must take away their eternal lives, but then why was he afraid that they'd eat of the tree of life since they already had eternal life before he doomed them to die? Something awfully circular and crazy in this whole account of the origins of the human species and life and death. Funny no one ever noticed these things back in the darkest days of human intelligence. Seems that for humankind to really get wise and intelligent, they took many millennia. Why did this hypothetical superbeing think that ignorant twosome had grown wise in the first place? They were pretty ignorant after all, so if their intelligence, dim as it was, nearly equaled his intelligence, he (the hypothetical one) was himself dumb as a post. Lot's of twists and turns in here, aren't there? 

Praise god, my ass. Glad to be rid of the hypothesis of him, I'd say. 

No comments: