The Dissonance of Structural Incoherence
Things that were Too Obvious to Consider Kept Ringing in my Head, year after year
These questions have been dangling in my face, ringing in my ears; voices in my head all my life, usually just below my own consciousness; patiently waiting for the noise to subside, the murkiness to settle, both internally and externally.
Far too often we lie to ourselves because this faith of our fathers is “Too Big To Fail.” We need it to be true! So we lie and don’t even know it.
Following is a list of points of structural incoherence: contradictions that I have not been able to resolve.
> How can we be created in the “image of god” and yet become the most disgusting creatures on earth in the eyes of the creator, even after being proclaimed good, along with all of creation? So disgusting and worthless that the ultimate destination for a vast number of people is eternal torture... for such a worm as I.
> Why is almost all of creation going to hell because of the design and decisions of a hidden god/creator that has two main attributes: invisibility and silence; refusing to be revealed as is necessary in every and all relationships?
> How can this god say that love is priority and yet not be willing to demonstrate the most important thing; show up and express oneself. How would that work in a human relationship?
> How can we think we know the only answers that are true to all of life better than all other people on earth if we are so disgusting, imperfect, fallen, and broken, needing to be spoon-fed the truth as secondhand human beings?
> The problem with any holy book proclaiming to be the word of god - infallible, inspired and inerrant - is that it contradicts the nature of language and words since a word is a mental concept and construct that can never be the reality itself but only a sign and symbol pointing toward reality. Words can never be reality nor absolute truth. Human language and words are not designed that way. Words are concepts or stories that are created by thought; little stories in our heads.
> Thought and the human mind cannot ascertain the eternal. Thought is limited by its own concepts and conceptions, images and ideas. The human mind’s limited function is to conceptualize god or create an image of god in our head. The problem is that worshiping any graven image, whether mental or physical, violates the second commandment of that very god. Exodus 20:3: "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth."
> Romans 1:20 “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” I used to believe this by lying to myself and giving myself no excuse. And such guilt it produced. It is different when my first impulse is no longer to lie to myself but rather to ask honest questions and to tell the truth and follow the truth wherever it may lead. So far, the only attributes that god has revealed is invisibility and silence. If “god so loves the world” and the greatest of all commandments is love to god and neighbor, then how can this hidden god demand a relationship of love without direct revelation? And how can this god hold in judgement humans that will not believe invisibility or silence, i.e. “nothing?” This god won't bother to uphold the other part of the relationship, as required in any and all relationships? Invisibility and silence is a violation of the most basic foundation of all relationships. In other words, relationship is not possible except in our imagination.
> If god is not able to provide direct revelation required for direct relationship, then that god
If that god is not willing and refuses to provide direct revelation required for direct relationship, then that god cannot be omnibenevolent.
If that god doesn’t realize the priority and importance of direct revelation required for direct relationship, then that god cannot be omniscient.
If such a god does not know his own creatures’ needs enough to realize the dire necessity of visual and auditory revelation required for relationship, then that god cannot be omnipresent.
I must then conclude that this god cannot be god and that this god is nothing but a human construct, a religious concept, and a mental graven image that exists only as a story in the collective mind of humanity and the culture they create.
And yet my mind is wide open to a solution on how this whole religion thing might really work without totally violating the laws of heaven and earth: i.e. laws of logic, relationships, language, creation, nature, universe, and reality. As we all know, there are a thousand reasons for religion throughout the world.
> Since irritation, annoyance, insults, and offenses are points of weakness and vulnerability for humans, why does it seem that the god of the universe is so often annoyed by those that he created in his image? (self-described in his own holy book) (See Behold Thy God)
> Since being angry and jealous are negative character traits of weakness, why does god so often describe himself as angry and jealous and even boast about it? (self-described in his own holy book) (See Behold Thy God)
> And by the way, why was god so angry all the time? God is the one that created us? Was creation a failure? Why didn’t god start over if it was that bad? Wouldn't that have better than God's torture chamber he supposedly uses now. (See Behold Thy God)
> We all know that a bully is a weak-minded, insecure being that uses violence to intimidate, dominate, and control others. So why does the attributes and self descriptions of god in his word use these interactions with man to control, destroy, or force submission when man is created as a thinking being with free will that can choose to love and do the right thing? After all, the key to all relationships is love that is unselfish and willing. And the key to all of life is love. (See Behold Thy God)
> It is interesting that the true believers use guilt and coercion rather than love. Is this because of bad role modeling from above?
> Why do I feel like I am instructing god here about doing the right thing and loving unconditionally? This puts humans in a very awkward position as teachers of the gods.
> When I study the bible, I see at least 4 different gods described, or self described since the bible is god's word:
1. the god of creation that seems excited to be revealed to mankind and who proclaimed to all of creation, "It is good!" Jesus replied, “I tell you, . . . if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out” (Luke 19:40). in Psalm 114:6, the mountains leap. Isaiah 55:12 says, “You will go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and hills will burst into song before you, and all the trees of the field will clap their hands.”
2. the god of the 10 commandments that was full of thunder and lightning, overcome with all consuming anger; killing those who looked at this fury and murdering those who worshipped graven images while waiting for Moses; then later causing genocide with a flood. This god then reemerged for the book of Revelation and the grand finale.
3. the god of the minor prophets at the end of the old testament that seemed to be settling down, gaining control of his anger, and beginning to treat humans decently. It is almost like he had a plan.
4. the god of jesus who had a plan to finally fix the mess that this world was in. The twist is that instead of blaming the creator, blame was placed on all humans for their disgusting sinfulness that god could not even look upon. The plan was that god was no longer one god as has been proclaimed throughout history but was now three so that god #1 could send god #2, his son to die to cover up the mess that was made and blame it on humans. Oh yeah. This of course came out of the well established idea of killing living sacrifices, both animal and human that was so prevalent in the Jewish religion and in all of the other religions with their many gods throughout that time in history.
> This evolution of god is very interesting. Either there are 4 gods with each one taking over from the previous god or there was a god that grew and changed and matured. The thing is this. If a thing or being is perfect, then it cannot change or improve. It cannot first be perfect and then be not perfect requiring it to change. Either it is perfect and never changes. Or it is not perfect. OR it is a series of better gods taking over for each other as each fails creation.
> Why is it that when we see humans as fallen, broken sinners, then they act like it? Case in point, observe Christianity over the past 5 years in America as it followed its bully president into darkness and destruction. Why is it that when we see and treat people as good, then they act good as if they were created in a divine image as part of a creation where the creator proclaimed, “it is good!”? A self fulfilling prophecy is what it is called. Adults that learn and that are worthy human beings are taught and trained to treat others as they want to be treated. They make better parents, teachers, civil servants, grandparents, leaders, and on and on.
> Since you ask so much of us, why can’t we sit down and have a one to one conversation with you like we would with our friends? Is there something you are afraid of?
> Is it vain and self-indulgent to insist that we praise and heap worship on you and is it a need that an omnipotent god would have? Why?
> Why do you refuse to sit down and answer our questions that are so critical to reality, truth, meaning, purpose, and understanding?
> Would it be so hard to indulge us with a monthly or yearly fireside chat???
> It is one thing to say to someone thousands of years ago that you care and have them write it in a script of which we have no original, only copies; making it hearsay. It is another thing to tangibly SHOW that you care like in any relationship. Invisibility and silence is no longer acceptable.
> Gendered god??? One of the first incoherences that I realized when I was younger is that if there is a god, then that god cannot be male or female for many reasons. One reason is that god is not human and there was no male or female prior to humanity. The primary reason though for me is that supposedly god created both male and female in god’s image. Therefore, if humans came from god, then both males and females are images of a god that is neither male nor female. I think calling god he/him/his is a patriarchal blindspot deeply embedded in our own language, speaking and reminding us of the dominance of males without saying a word. In other words, our default concept of god is inherently sexist implying a foundational relationship of the oppressor and the oppressed; i.e. structural inequality. So in order for me to avoid carrying on this deeply insulting insinuation of both god and those created in god’s image, I need to begin to watch the pronouns that I use so that I do not carry on such domination, which is simply a subtle form of violence.
See "What are God's pronouns? How the church today is (or isn't) gendering God." https://religionnews.com/2021/11/18/what-are-gods-pronouns-how-the-church-today-is-or-isnt-gendering-god
> "The almighty’s genderless. The Lakota refer to our Creator as Wakan Tanka — “the Great Mystery.” Because only a misogynistic, male centric religion assigns a gender to their “god.” @lakotaman1
Plus 10,000 other things… still coming
No comments:
Post a Comment