Source: San Diego City Beat Link: http://www.sdcitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/your_god_sucks/6611/ Title: "Your God sucks", by Edwin Decker Date: February 5, 2008 San Diego columnist, author, and poet Edwin Decker considers the "hardcore God-worshipper types" that say stupid things about current events: Indeed, 'tis sad that people continue to cling to such terrible gods. Yet these deities are of human origin; their capacity for stupid, malicious tantrums is of human origin. It certainly makes more sense than the perfect monotheistic source of all being so petty and narrow as to render itself markedly finite. So God is an inconsistent, reckless, stupid jerk with poor timing who likes to shoot Himself in the foot on a regular basis. Sounds rather quite human, doesn't He? And why not? After all, we are made in His image. Right? Right? In the end, such a God says more about the people who invented It. After all— —if we just ... ah, but no. Then we'd be searching for Utopia, and since so many people say it's impossible, it would be better if we didn't waste our time trying. Right?
I know I wouldn't want to worship some pussy God. What good is your deity if he won't enforce your desires on everyone else? I like my Jesus personal, thanks.
actually your presentation says nothing about the philosophical limitations of a monotheistic god it does however present issues with persons who (mis)represent him Formulating a philosophical dissertation for god's non-existence requires thought, sensitivity and approaching the best form of an argument. Judging a genre by its worst stereotype requires the exact opposite.
You are totally missing the point, giantboob. Tiassa isn't talking about God; he's talking about gods. These people's gods. You know, the superstitious beliefs we like to cling to, where the guy who watches out for us looks just likes us and even drinks the same brand of beer we do (Bud, by the way). It's the very human phenomenon of modeling our gods after ourselves, then praying to them. It's sort of an ultimate blaspheme. Tiassa's post simply points out how terrible these people are to worship a being who does that sort of thing; implicit in the argument is a) aren't these people terrible? (no, they're not, they're just people) b) and why don't they get a new god that isn't such a jerk? What Tiassa's author fails to realize, though, is that these people need a god with these limitations. It's what makes the god so appealing in the first place!
didn't mean to waste your valuable net browsing time there Roman ol chum Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Tiassa also concludes by suggesting the notion of a monotheistic god being unattainable, etc (much like you do) and how? By taking the worst form of the argument as a subject for analysis :shrug:
Because if you hate gay people then a god who punishes people who don't hate gays like you do is a god who shares your values and has done nothing wrong in your eyes so why change? God is always on your side I know I would keep worshipping that god if they always did what I wanted.
This and that Perhaps. I think that point might be outside the scope of the article. Its purpose, generally, is to ridicule a really stupid idea that isn't ridiculed enough. (I'll ask, if it comes up. But it would be sort of awkward to just say, "Hey, Ed ... before you wrote that one article, did you stop to think about ...?" I don't know him all that well. Suffice to say he's a blast to drink with.) • • • While God, in such a sense, may well be unattainable, that is entirely a separate issue. The conclusion of my post refers to the idea of the God that people invent. Which, I suppose, leads back to the point of unattainability. The limitation is our own. But the fact of a bunch of bigot prigs actually has nothing to do with the broader issue you're trying to invoke.
The Universe lay dormant at just above absolute zero (due to the preexistence of a god figure,) when all of a sudden there thunk a thought. "I am bored" thunk God setting off a chain reaction which was similar to a fart, in a tightly packed elevator.
Actually, I totally agree with you. Clearly me, Tiassa, and the author all clearly think this God character is a totally daft idea, and absolute bunk. And I would agree with you that this is indeed the underlying sentiment for the OPs case, and mine as well. However, this still ignores what so many people hold a god to be- little more than an idol they pray to that looks like something familiar and brings rain for the crops or kills fags. Even if we think your idea of god is also retarded, this is about people who have even more retarded ideas of what god is, and points out, gleefully, what retards they are. What subhuman hypocrites they must be, blah blah blah. Goddammit. I wish more discussion here could be more discussion and less proxy-arguments for stupid stuff like red vs. blue and which is better- coke or pepsi?
well the cats finally out of the bag .... what a surprise yep - thats the worst form of the genre, i agree fine my suggestion is that you go for the best form of the argument rather than the worst so do I
Utopia can exist for each one of us in our own way to believe it to be. The problem is that others always find our secret out and want to join the utopia with us which then wouldn't be utopia any longer. Utopia can exist in ones mind as well, but again others are always screwing with it aren't they?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
