Warning: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, no array or string given in /home/content/70/10053470/html/joelklebanoff/joelsblog2/wp-includes/class-wp-hook.php on line 298

Joel Klebanoff: Stuff & Nonsense

To worry is to be. To be is to worry.

Type A Limited God

If you believe in the Book of Genesis in the Old Testament, which is the foundation of Judeo-Christian faith, I think you have to come to the conclusion that God has a Type A personality and is a touch less than omnipotent.

Think about it.

He creates the heavens, Earth, light, water, sky, the sun, the planets, all of the creatures on Earth, all of the plants on Earth, and a whole bunch of other stuff that I’ve undoubtedly forgotten about; He gathers together the waters and separates them from the rocks, soil and other non-liquid stuff; He separates the light from the dark; He undertakes a whole bunch of other tasks that I’ve undoubtedly forgotten about; and He does all of this in only six days.

Talk about driven! What the hell was his hurry? That’s the definition of a Type A personality right there.

Why couldn’t He have been a more laid-back Dude? It’s not as if anyone was watching. He could have easily stretched it out to a five- or ten-year project. No one would have complained or even have noticed.

Create a few galaxies. Relax with a martini.

Create a few more galaxies. Read a good book.

Create Earth. Catch a movie.

Create light, but only after the movie is finished so you don’t spoil the film. Unless, of course, you don’t enjoy the film, in which case, by all means, feel free to bring up the lights in the middle. Have a snack.

Dump some water on Earth. Play solitaire.

Separate the water and the earth so there won’t be so much mud. Stare off into the space you created earlier.

Create a few plants. Have a nice meal.

Create a few animals. Go for a walk.

Create man and let him jerk off for a while. Take a nice long nap.

Create woman so man doesn’t have to jerk off as often. Catch some television.

And You’re done.

See. He didn’t have to hurry so much. What was His rush? Did He have an appointment to get to? If so, with whom? Would it have killed Him to slow down a bit? He should have taken a deity-strength Valium and stopped to smell the flowers after He created them.

And on the seventh day He rested. What the hell was that all about?

I thought He was supposed to be omnipotent. Why did He need the rest? Couldn’t He have started right off on spying on His creatures; listening to their whiny, petty little prayers; smiting a few evildoers unless they’ve repented or paid dispensation to the appropriate church, in which case they’re off the hook; creating a few earthquakes and hurricanes to make things entertaining and to give the news networks something to report on; or whatever the hell it is that He’s doing to fill his time these days?

Of course, that having been said, it’s a damn good thing for us that He did rest on the seventh day. Otherwise, our calendars would have only six-day weeks and we’d get much less time off. Who the hell needs that? Not me. I’m not that driven.

By the way, can any of you spare any hotdogs or marshmallows? I figure that if my atheism is misguided I’m going to be spending a lot of time in hell. I might as well have something to roast while I’m there.

bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark

Share

Categorised as: religion


60 Comments

  1. Patricia says:

    You’re contradicting yourself. First, you chastise God for being a Type A and rushing through creation. Then, you chastise him for being lazy on the seventh day. Which is it? Make up your mind!

  2. I’m not sharing any of my hotdogs or marshmallows until you show up. If I share early, I’ll never know if they went to waste.

    I don’t think God did either one, get all Type A and then take off. I think someone just thought of using God’s industry (spread over millenia or longer) and an unattainable example for the lazy good-for-nothings around them content to gather or whatever just enough to sustain themselves, but not particularly eager to accomplish anything.

    Then the story about resting on the seventh day was a ploy to eliminate work as an excuse so they’d have no choice but to go to church instead of staying home and watching football.

    Different manipulations for different audiences. Or maybe the same one.

    • Stephanie Barr: I think I’m older than you (respect your elders) so I’ll probably get there before you. What am I going to roast until you get there?

      If they’re going to make up stories, why couldn’t God have created the heavens and the earth and done all of that other stuff in one day and then rested for six days? Our life would be a lot more laid back, although it would shoot our economy all to hell.

  3. Theresa says:

    If Stephanie is bringing the marshmallows then I’ll bring the chocolate. Now we just need someone to bring along some graham crackers for some s’mores. Hope you like s’mores Joel!

  4. Jude says:

    Personally I don’t believe in hell so I don’t think any of you will need to take provisions. I also don’t believe there’s a heaven lined with streets of gold and all that other human valued crap.

  5. nonamedufus says:

    God? That’s not God you’re talking about. That’s the federal government. You’ve taken a page from Sponsorship 101, Joel. πŸ˜‰

    • nonamedufus: OK, you’ll have to explain that more. I’m missing the reference. I don’t remember seeing Steven Harper slapping the Conservative Party’s logo on any of the alleged God’s handiwork. At least, not yet. πŸ˜‰

      • nonamedufus says:

        Sorry, it was several governments ago. Remember Jean “what’s wrong with my logo on golf ball” Chretien? I suppose it was a swipe at big government writ large too. You know: relax, martini, good book, catch a movie seemed to be a reference to how fast government works. *sigh* We former bureaucrats know our modus operandi when we see it.

        • nonamedufus: Sorry, the speed reference didn’t come to mind. I guess we need to look for a middle ground between godspeed and bureaucrat-speed.

          Yeah, I remember the little guy from Shawinigan. Funny how history repeats itself. He put his logo on golf balls, now the Conservative party is putting its logo on mock government cheques. Too bad I can’t vote for the Bloc.

  6. ninica says:

    Joel,i like your way of no consistence ……..
    One moment,while i was reading one of your posts i was sure that you are not atheist.
    I know,you told me you are not religious at all..well tell me ,if you are atheist ,why you need hot dogs for “killing” your time in hell?Dear as atheist you know that there is no hell or heaven,only BIG nothing!!!!

    • ninica: If I wrote anything in the past that made it sound as if I am not an atheist then I was definitely joking at the time or I didn’t express myself well. Either is possible. I’ve been a devout atheist for as long as I can remember.

      In this post, I was joking about hell. I do believe in the big nothing. It might be nice to think there is something after this life since most of us (particularly, but not exclusively me) make such a waste of this one, but I believe there is nothing but eternal nothingness after this. Sorry.

  7. ninica says:

    i forgot if there is a hell i will bring you myself!

  8. LOBO says:

    Haha!!! Great post!

    (You are wearing shoes with rubber soles, right?)

  9. Sandra says:

    Funny post! Loved it. Just so you know, although you probably don’t care, some of us who believe in God (as the universal source of life) don’t necessarily believe everything in the bible. Some even believe that the old testament was written by “evil” people because it does not describe a loving and compassionate God (but the type A personality you refer to), and some of us don’t believe in hell as described by many evangelical pastors. (A proper word study shows that it was just a metaphor.)

    I do, however, believe in life after death… if I didn’t, I would end it all right now. Why would I put up with this earthly “human valued crap,” if that is all there is? That would just be ridiculous (in my humble opinion).

    Thanks for the humor dude!

    • Sandra: Thanks. Glad you loved it.

      I don’t come from a very religious family. But what religion I did get came strictly from the Old Testament. Everything that came after that was the work of pagans. Then again … never mind. Of course, I was just kidding about the “pagans” remark. You know what I think about all religions.

      Yes, I know there are a great many variations on belief. I was trying to go more for humor than making a point. I don’t always succeed at that.

      “I do, however, believe in life after death… if I didn’t, I would end it all right now.” That’s a sentiment that I’ve never understood. If there is an afterlife that is all sweetness and light, why wouldn’t you want to get there faster? (Not that I’m recommending that.) And if there isn’t, and this is all we’ve got, why would you be so eager to give up your one chance at experiencing our little piece of the universe, even with all of the “human valued crap”? If I’m right, you’re not going to get another chance. There are no do-overs, so make of this what you can and will.

  10. We can never put God in a box. That is being too presumptuous. Your observations show a lack of understanding of the sovereign God. God can create the universe in six days or in 6,000 years. A day is like a thousand years with God. And God does not need a martini to relax. Your statements show utter contempt of God. I will not argue with you since you seem to lack appreciation of the true nature of God. I will just pray for you so that God gives you the grace of understanding and humility. Thanks for the post. God bless.

    • Mel Avila Alarilla: Let’s skip the diplomacy that I’m normally inclined toward. You caught me in one of those moods. I’m sure you realize that I think you’re out of your mind. Then again, based on what you’ve said, you seem to think the same of me. So we’re even. One of us is wrong. Neither of us can prove which one it is.

      I unreservedly respect your right to hold your beliefs. I just think they are totally wrong. And I unreservedly assert my right to hold that belief.

      You’re welcome for the post. I hope you have tremendous luck in this godless world, but I’m convinced that’s a complete crapshoot.

      By the way, does your God have a sense of humor? Just wondering.

  11. Personally, I think He should’ve taken eight days and given us all a three day weekend.

  12. David says:

    I no longer believe there is an afterlife and I’m becoming highly skeptical of god. I had great respect for the god of the bible who could smite mine enemies. I really enjoy observing a good and well-deserved smiting.

    Sadly, I see no such smiting going on in modern times so I’ve come to believe that either all the biblical smiting was just so much hooey or the alleged god doing so was so whimsical and inconsistent as to be anything but omipotent.

    sigh.

    • David: Yes, there’s nothing like a little good, old-fashioned smiting to provide entertainment when things get boring.

      I have a number of reasons for not believing in a god. Among them are all of the Jobian questions about how a world created and ruled by a god could contain so much evil and so many catastrophes such as earthquakes and hurricanes that cause such suffering for good people an evil people apparently equally. But my biggest reason for being an atheist is that, despite how impossible it is for us, with a finite number of neurons and synapses to devote to the problem, to discover precisely how the universe and the first life-form arose, it is infinitely more difficult to explain how an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being capable of creating the universe and life could possibly come into existence.

      For me, it comes down to Occam’s razor. It says that if you’ve got two competing theories that propose to answer the same question, and there is no greater weight of evidence behind either theory, the simpler theory is the better one. I think that what you sited about all of the smiting going on, plus the apparent randomness of the ill effects of natural disasters, plus the implausibility of an entity like a god being able to come into existence add up to a greater weight of evidence that there is no god than what religion has to offer as evidence of a god. However, even if not and the two have equally weighted evidence, Occam’s razor would still award the win to atheism.

  13. UNRR says:

    This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 10/20/2009, at The Unreligious Right

    • UNRR: Thanks. I appreciate being featured on your site. Although, I suspect that there are one or two people out there who would not be happy that you provided the link to here or to some of the other sites you link to. Screw ’em. Keep up the good work! Thanks again.

  14. I thought you were already preying on me, and Candy Palooza didn’t show up yet? How about Ms. Pinky?

    • Doctor Faustroll: They haven’t shown up yet. I have to admit that I had to do a Google search to find out who they were and, as best as I can tell, they are fictional characters. If so, I don’t need them. If I’ve already got perfectly good fictional characters in my love life.

      • I’m sending Sugarporn Poopadoodle on a mission from me.

        • Doctor Faustroll: I’m eagerly awaiting her arrival.

          • Make sure to double-bag.

            BTW, this is the first time I noticed I could continue posting after the fourth entry in an indented thread. Did you make a change to the commenting limits?

            • Doctor Faustroll: I’ve got the bags ready.

              About the threading limit. Yes, I’ve been playing around with it. It had been set at 4 for most of the time since I started using threaded comments. I had it at 6 for a while, but because the template indents each new level, that wasn’t leaving much room for the comment at the sixth level, so I dropped it back to 5. I’m probably going to leave it at 5, and I can’t see me ever dropping below 4, but if you want to be absolutely certain that your comment stays threaded properly, I wouldn’t push it past 4.

              If I do drop the thread limit and you’ve gone beyond it, your comment doesn’t disappear, but it will be displayed as if it is a new thread.

            • Doctor Faustroll: By the way, about the threaded comments, I usually reply to comments using the administrator’s panel, which doesn’t show me threading at all. So if it my reply looks as if I haven’t seen the threading, that’s probably because I haven’t. If the comment makes absolutely no sense to me out of context I’ll sometimes go to the blog to see if it makes sense in context. But I’m sure there are times that it makes sense to me out of context, just not the sense that the comment author intended. Sorry about that.

  15. RedRaider says:

    With any luck you’ll just be waiting tables in the smoking section of a restaurant in Heaven. Stranger things have happened I’m sure.

    • RedRaider: I’m looking forward to it. I’m not now, nor have I ever been a smoker, so I’d rather not get the smoking section, but I’ll bet they tip big in heaven. And when I say big, I mean really big. And what’s second-hand smoke going to do to me in heaven? Kill me? Too late. Woohoo! Things are looking up, so to speak.

  16. ettarose says:

    I read a book once titled “Letters From Earth” by Mark Twain. It was published after his death and I think it was written when he was going through a rough patch. Changed my thinking for sure. Now I am not sure what the deal is. Whatever may be I am wearing rubber soled shoes for a while longer.

    • ettarose: Thanks. I hadn’t heard of “Letters From Earth”. It sounds like something I should read. Any book that doesn’t get published until 40 years after the author’s death because it was considered to be blasphemous is probably my kind of book.

      I did a little searching on the Web and saw a couple of people who said it made them into non-believers or better non-believers. Then again, if, rather than just being published posthumously, he had written it after his death then I might become a believer.

      By the way, do you think if we all got together we could get a bulk-buying discount on rubber-soled shoes?

  17. rabuday says:

    This is now a ridiculously offensive tirade for us to believers. If you don’t believe in God, just write it in a way that does not degrade and disparage the sentiments of believers about God. If you don’t believe God, and no one and nothing in the universe can make you change your mind about God, then please stop talking about Him. Why talk about God when you don’t believe in God? Why you talk about stuff that you don’t believe, know nothing of and have no idea of?
    All you said here are based on beliefs based on your lack of insight, understanding, awareness and sensitivity. I’m sorry I can’t visit your blog anymore. It just breaks me because of how you condemn God. What did God do to you that you hate Him so much? If you don’t believe in God, then you should not believe that there is something He did to you or for you, so please stop talking about Him if you don’t know anything about Him.
    The next time you attempt to read the Bible, pray for understanding. But if you don’t believe in prayer, then don’t read the Bible. The Bible is difficult to understand even to believers , how much more to atheists like you?

    • rabuday: Here’s the deal. I’ll stop talking about my religious beliefs (or rather non-beliefes) if you’ll stop talking about yours. No? I didn’t think so. You’re being hypocritical. Why is it that when I discuss my beliefs I’m insulting believers, but if you express your beliefs you’re not insulting atheists?

      Here’s a thought. If you don’t want to read my blog, don’t. But don’t tell me I don’t have a right to free speech on a site I pay for out of my own pocket. I do have that right. Now, if you want to have a debate about whether there is a God, I’ll consider that. Although if you really are interested in that debate (it sounds as though you’re not, you just want to spout your own beliefs) then there are atheists who are much better qualified to debate that with you than I am. I’m just trying to be somewhat funny.

      While I might be willing to consider a reasoned debate, if all you want to do is to tell me to shut up on my own site, then go away and leave me alone. You’re a damned hypocrite. In the unlikely event that you’re right about god, I hope he punishes you for that.

  18. Paul Baines says:

    Hmmm… how about Christians turning the other cheek? Funny how vociferous god fearing people can be when it comes to any other opinion than the devout.

    • Paul Baines: Yeah, I’ve noticed that. A few of them are unbelievably hypocritical. If you talk about atheism or make a joke about religion they go on a tirade about how you are insulting religious people. However, they have no problem about loudly spouting in public, using the most vicious of language, to damn anyone who doesn’t believe the same things they do, whether that is someone who believes in a different religion or doesn’t believe in any religion at all. I wonder if they ever listen to themselves and, if so, how can they not hear their blatant and sometimes vile hypocrisy?

  19. Eliana says:

    I JUST LOVE YOUR BLOGS!!! All of them! Even more the religious ones.

    I am an atheist too, and not because of that – but I don’t see this particular blog being insulting at all, rather funny actually.

    Please keep them coming! All subjects! πŸ™‚

    PS: I guess this last person (rabuday) does not realized that several atheists are very knowledgeable and deep understanding of the bible and many other religious books and different religions beliefs.

    thanks

    • Eliana: Thanks! I’m glad you enjoyed it.

      I never intentionally insult anyone here. This is supposed to be a humorous blog. I don’t always succeed in that, but I always try. Unfortunately, people sometimes think my humor is insulting them. That’s certainly not the intent, but the truth is that I don’t think it’s possible to ever be funny without risking pissing someone off because a lot of people are incredibly oversensitive.

      I’m an atheist, but I’m not on a mission to convert anyone to atheism. I can’t prove there is no god (how do you disprove a hypothesis that is defined in a way to make it’s disproof impossible?), but no one so far has been able to prove there is a god either. (Note: I don’t consider human-written stories to be proof.)

      I think the preponderance of evidence is greatly against the god hypothesis, but a preponderance of evidence, no matter how strong, is not proof, at least not in this case. So it’s up to thinking people to make that decision for themselves. I don’t presume to judge any thinking person’s answer to that question. The people who I have no use for are the non-thinking people who merely accept the existence of god, or the non-existence of a god for that matter, because some charismatic person told them they should. Listen to the arguments on both sides–there are intelligent people who have presented both cases–and then make your own judgement.

      Oh, I also have no use for someone who tells me he is free to spout his thoughts, on my own blog no less, but I’m not free to write my own thoughts here despite the fact that I don’t use a free blogging service and I pay for the space on this server. That sort of person can go away and not come back and I won’t miss them in the least.

      But, the bottom line is, I’m just trying to have a little fun here.

      Sorry, that was a rather long way to say that I’m glad you love my blog. I hope you’ll continue to do so, but please forgive me the occasional less than stellar post. After all, I’ve never claimed to be a god or even created in a god’s image, so I’m far from perfect. THANKS!

  20. JC says:

    Your first entry said people are actually reading your blog and your articles about your lack of knowledge in God draws attention.It just means that there are not only people who believe in God but WANT to believe in God like you. Because if you don’t want to believe in God, then why gab about him? You cannot mock God even if you don’t believe in him. Your unlimited knowledge of God shows here that your wry and stupid to sarcastically attempt to dispute his existence manifests your “lack of comprehension” of a god –even a god. Your points here are nonsensical other than mocking him. Because that’s not what creation is all about. Proves to say that you just either want attention to your blog by using God or you’re showing off to the world you don’t have nothing to say other than your unbelief. If you don’t believe , what do you believe? Yourself ? As your own god? Remember you’re fallible human being and if God is also fallible and weak according to your “conception” then who is more fallible? Or rather superior?
    Just stick to your nonsense because talking about God in your “nonsensical” way will make people just ignore it or you make people get their attention that you never know, understand, see or grasp the meaning of what is essential to life .

    • JC: The mistake you make is in describing what I’m doing as “gabbing” about god. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’m not gabbing about him, I’m joking about “him” because I think he’s an absurd fiction. Oh, and just so you know, just as you think that I don’t “know, understand, see or grasp the meaning of what is essential to life,” I think exactly the same thing about you because of what I believe are your misguided beliefs in a fiction. I fully respect your right to have ideas and opinions that differ from mine. All I ask is that you respect my right to have ideas and opinions that are different from yours.

      You asked what I do believe. I believe that everything we are and everything the universe is can be explained by physical, chemical and biological laws (I mean “laws” in the scientific sense, not government or deity laws). I believe that those laws are far too many and complex, by several orders of magnitude, for us to ever understand completely in their intricate detail, but I’ve never believed that my ignorance or any one else’s ignorance of the complete details of those laws is in any way proof (or disproof for that matter) of a god. I do, however, believe that if we want to create a purpose for ourselves, trying to better our understanding of those physical and chemical laws would be a much better one than to invent a mythical deity for us to worship.

    • JC: Oh one more thing. Regarding your suggestion that people ignoring me because of my “nonsensical” joking, that doesn’t seem to be the case. This post has received one of the highest comment counts I’ve ever gotten on this blog. Some people agreed with me. Some people carried the joke farther. And some people felt the way you did. And one person mentioned that this blog post was linked to by a Web site that tracks atheist leaning Web content. So, ignored? No, I don’t think so.

  21. Rob says:

    I’ll take a “type-A God” any day over the idea that this beautiful world and the wonder of life all just nonsensically exploded into existence from nothing, by no one, for no reason at all. There’s so much beauty, order and detail to the world that I could never accept that it all just exploded out of nothing for no reason.

    (besides, outside of an intervention of the Divine, that would violate Newton’s third law of thermodynamics… πŸ™‚

    • Rob: If the universe developed under natural (not deity-given) laws of physics then it would have to be a universe of order because it has to follow those laws of physics. Physics (and chemistry) enforces order. Given that there are laws of physics, the only way to have a world that isn’t ordered would be if it were under a deity’s control because then that deity could break those laws. But without a deity, not only can there be an ordered universe, but there has to be.

      And, it’s not surprising that we should find beauty in the world. Beauty is a purely subjective judgement. Our brains evolved in this universe. If our brains did not get wired in such a way that we found some things in the universe to be beautiful humans probably would have all committed suicide long ago and our species wouldn’t be here today.

      How do you figure that the big bang violates Newton’s third law of thermodynamics? As I understand it, the third law basically says, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. It says nothing about the original cause, if any, of the initial action. We don’t know what happened at the time of the big bang, so we don’t know whether there was an equal and opposite reaction to the big bang.

      In addition, Newton’s third law of thermodynamics applies only if there are two objects involved. It doesn’t apply when considering multiple forces acting on a single object because, even under Newton’s law, those forces can cancel each other out. Because we are talking about the forces acting on the seed, if you will, of the universe as a whole, not the elements within it, Newton’s law has nothing to say about the big bang.

      What’s more, we only know about the laws of physics that operate in this universe (and our understanding of those laws of physics is incomplete and, almost certainly, includes a few inaccuracies). We have enough trouble trying to figure out our own universe. For all we know, another universe might operate under a completely different set of laws of physics. Thus, because the big bang created our universe, there is nothing to say that the laws of physics operational in our universe were operational at the instant of the big bang. So Newtons third law of thermodynamics–and all of the other laws of physics as we understand them–might not have applied at the instant of the big bang.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



Read previous post:
Worrying About …

Have you ever had a song pop into your head for no apparent reason? You hadn't heard it for quite...

Close