«
»

the shaming animosity of “my god can beat up your god”

<note that this video has some spontaneous extra comments beyond the text below. This video is FUN!>

Ah yes, the holy scriptures of some ancient religious tradition– translated, second-hand or third-hand words to discuss. How about these most ancient of prayers: “God, most Christians are so freaking blind- don’t you agree with me, God?” or “God, my sister just does not understand me and how holy I am, and she really should and it’s just so frustrating- don’t you agree with me, God?”

I call that the experience of isolation and condemnation, that is, accusation, which is the “spirit of the divisive one, the devil.” One might notice the repenting from such “sin” and the peace of such repenting.  One may have been trying to get God (or even particular other people) to take their side in some more or less imaginary antagonistic drama. “God, most people do not even recognize the importance of religion, and how proud I am of all the humility I have developed by serving others through forwarding political satires on facebook- don’t you agree with me, God?” “God, did you notice how unenlightened that person’s language is- it’s so negative- how can they even live with themselves- don’t you agree with me, God?”

The isolating and condemning is the worship of a distant God, one that is not within all forms, forming all expressions of God. That is idolatry. That is implying “oh, those Fundamentalists do not have as much God as I do” or “that person is not created in God’s image as much as I am.” That is vanity.

It’s cool, though. Everyone makes “mistakes.” We didn’t even know what we were doing.

We were isolating and condemning God with our language, and it can be a relief to get that- it was just some mistranslation in the language, like a slight confusion between two similar-sounding words when learning to understand a British dialect or idiom, or maybe some little typing error in the software code. It’s kind of funny- not heavy like “this is very important!” – just peaceful.

“Oh, now I see the issue! God, don’t I agree with you? Didn’t I repent of making an enemy out of you? Well, if I was going to blame someone and make myself out to be the big victim of the devil, you were the obvious one to make into a devil, God, because the Lord our God is ONE.”

It’s not that after I forgive someone else of their horrible sin because I am such a holy person, then God forgives me because I earned it. It’s that when I repent of my condemnation, condemnation is revealed as a figment of language, a sign of mental illwillness, madness, temporary insanity, an innocent, instinctual tantrum.

God does not love me more suddenly because I just forgave someone even though they are evil and ugly and stupid and mean and antagonistic and egotistical (like I’ve been?). What shifts is that I receive God’s love as I let it flow through me to the other forms of the single God.

By the way, materialism is totally a non-issue. Materialism is not holy and anti-materialism is not any more holy than materialism, even if anti-materialism is even more vain.

“I know the right way. Your way is wrong. I’m better than you!”

That is the divided antagonistic vanity typical of a developmental advancement of about two years old- which is way more intelligent than eighteen months old, right? Apparently, that developmental stage can take a while to “master,” though, and however long it takes is just however long it takes….

“You’re mean and rude and hypocritical and- gasp- a materialist. You deserve to be punished. I have utterly no compassion for people like you. Plus, your mama is a whore for the mafia. By the way, do you like me?”

It all comes down to attracting attention. Or, hey, maybe I have no idea what I’m talking about…. The bottom line is that my God can beat up your God. 😉

<note: the link on this lower image shows up as “broken,” but then works when I click it. It depicts a nude women being tortured during the Spanish Inquisition, with a seated man taking notes and another man pouring some colored liquid into a funnel that he appears to have forced into her mouth.>

published:  April 12, 2010

relocated as a page: February 29, 2012

Related articles
Related articles

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This entry was posted on March 1, 2012 at 12:10 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

4 Responses to “the shaming animosity of “my god can beat up your god””

  1. jerrellctn Says:
    March 11, 2012 at 7:30 pm | Reply

    I can not accept the fundamentalist view of strict interpretation of the Bible as the end all and be all. I find it difficult to accept those doctrines that are squarely based on some 2,000 year old letters. First, are these letters unadulterated by copy errors. Second, did the witnesses understand what was really happening, and could they relate what was seen in terms that 21st century people could understand. To use the Bible as a shield from the discoveries of science (the earth is not flat, the sun does not revolve around the earth, demons and devils do not cause disease and such like) is the height of arrogance and stupidity. “The Bible says it, I believe it and that is that” kind of summarizes what I can not accept.

    Notwithstanding this position, I must confess that if one wants to believe the doctrine of strict and literal interpretation of the Bible, then so what? Just don’t start another inquisition or war to enforce your ironclad beliefs on me. I have my own “salvation” to look to, and I seek my God based on what I know to be true, but I am willing to revise my conclusions based on new knowledge. Grow or die!

    Vanity of vanities, all is vanity, or stated another way, everyone is right and everyone is wrong since only God can reveal God since only God knows all about Himself. Our position is to learn all we can, and live accordingly. One can not look within while looking out.

    • jrfibonacci Says:
      March 11, 2012 at 9:47 pm | Reply

      I agree. I also add that if some fundamentalist insists that there is such a thing as something like baldness OTHER THAN AS A LABEL, that is still fundamentalism. There is such a thing as hair, but there is no such thing as a baldness. Bald is just an adjective. Baldness is not an actual tangible something, so to say “my baldness was caused by ____” is a convenience in language, but is not literally sensible.

      Likewise, as for those who insist that there is such a thing as scurvy and that it is incurable, those fundamentalists are just as idiotic as the ones who insist on the existence of diabetes or cancer or demons, then call them incurable. Entire linguistic models are fallacy from the beginning.

      Scurvy is just a label. It is not a physical thing. It does not do anything like cause baldness (and baldness does not cause hair loss). Infants born without hair do not have a case of baldness. They have heads. Some heads have hair and some do not. That’s it!

      As for scurvy, some organisms have lots of Vitamin C and some do not. There is no such presence as a scurvy to be “cured” or to be labeled as “incurable.” Same for cancer and diabetes and autism and all the various diagnostic labels for the natural physiological developments that correspond to particular metabolic and biochemical patterns.

      Cancer does not cause tumors. Cancer is just a label in language. Tumors are the concentration of physical substance from when the immune system is overwhelmed (lacking the capacity to handle the removal of a particular amount of “waste”). In the presence of tumors, some idiot can come along and say “you are possessed by a cancer and now we need to do an exorcism and it will take 3 years and cost $300,000, but we will charge most of that to the taxpayers of Canada, so just relax.”

      • jerrellctn Says:
        March 12, 2012 at 12:58 am

        Please do not use examples of baldness as I resemble that, and it ain’t getting thicker! Enjoyed your reply. Best wishes.

    • jrfibonacci Says:
      March 12, 2012 at 2:03 am | Reply

      Best wishes to you as well. Incidentally, I have a receding hairline along the front plus a “crown” of hairless head in the back.

Leave a comment