My complaint against God
01 Dec '05 08:29It occured to me that it would only be fair if I presented this one as well.
It's unlikely that this letter will win me many friends or even garner much attention. However, writing it is the only way I know to plant markers that define the limits of what is mingy and what is not. In the rest of this letter, I will use history and science (in the Hegelian sense) to prove that God's votaries would sooner ally with evil than oppose it. God is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, he has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people he desires to lead.
God has been deluding people into believing that the best way to serve one's country is to infiltrate the media with the express purpose of disseminating obscene information. Don't let him delude you, too. Something recently occurred to me that might occur to God, as well, if he would just turn down the volume of his voice for a moment: I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for God's subterfuge. I'm absolutely stunned. I may not believe that there's no difference between normal people like you and me and coldhearted hostes generis humani, but I honestly do think that he should learn to appreciate what he has instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he wants, every time he wants to. Will God's unsavory pals impose a narrow theological agenda on secular society? Only time will tell.
Even without the scary ideology of authoritarianism in the picture, we can still say that we can't afford to be so self-serving in such difficult times. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is that he has been known to say that people are pawns to be used and manipulated. That notion is so stolid, I hardly know where to begin refuting it. God knows how to lie. It's too bad he doesn't yet understand the ramifications of lying. Nevertheless, his faculty for deception is so far above anyone else's, it really must be considered different in kind as well as in degree.
The comparison between God and peremptory, vitriolic bums is remarkable, but given the way things are these days, we must remember that if you ever ask God to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. Pardon my coarse language, but if he can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to his lackadaisical, longiloquent prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Unholy Rhetoric. In the meantime, God has been offering disloyal scofflaws a lot of money to revive an arcadian past that never existed. This is blood money, plain and simple. Anyone thinking of accepting it should realize that God's sympathizers are unified under a common goal. That goal is to destroy everything beautiful and good.
When I observe God's peons' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like him, they all want to irrationalize thinking on every issue. Also, while a monkey might think that God's zingers are not worth getting outraged about, the fact remains that when I was a child, my clergyman told me, "God's adept at spinning lies." If you think about it you'll see his point. God's slurs promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for God's spin doctors because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to God. In order for us to realize more happiness in our lives, we need to understand that it is pointless to fret about the damage already caused by his disdainful hijinks. The past cannot be changed. We must cope with the present if we hope to affect our future and work together towards a shared vision. What does God have to say about all of this? The answer, as expected, is nothing.
If the past is any indication of the future, God will once again attempt to prime the pump of credentialism. I don't think it is a mere coincidence that his pronouncements are not normal, but that's really beside the point. He claims that everything is happy and fine and good. I would say that that claim is 70% folderol, 20% twaddle, and 10% another wretched attempt to ascribe opinions to me that I don't even hold. It's possible that God doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of quislingism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we bring meaning, direction, and purpose into our lives.
One can predict on empirical grounds that eventually God will wage an odd sort of warfare upon a largely unprepared and unrecognizing public. But even if we disregard all that and examine only his benighted, vile expositions, this seems to me to be enough to show that it's possible that he exhibits the sensitivity of a bulldozer. However, I cannot speculate about that possibility here because I need to devote more space to a description of how God's backers are merely ciphers. God is the one who decides whether or not to violate the basic tenets of journalism and scholarship. God is the one who gives out the orders to base racial definitions on lineage, phrenological characteristics, skin hue, and religion. And God is the one trying to conceal how it's ethically bankrupt for him to reduce us to acute penury. Or perhaps I should say, it's crass. To parody the old song, "Fish gotta swim, God gotta crush people to the earth and then claim the right to trample on them forever because they are prostrate." There are some simple truths in this world. First, he utilizes a narrow and static view of human nature. Second, there is much more of this to come. And finally, documents written by his operatives typically include the line, "God's ventures are good for the environment, human rights, and baby seals", in large, 30-point type, as if the size of the font gives weight to the words. In reality, all that that fancy formatting really does is underscore the fact that God possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, he can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it.
Granted, God's forces form a raucous organization devoted to harassment and barratry. But God wants to pit the haves against the have-nots. Such intolerance is felt by all people, from every background.
God's list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that he seizes every opportunity to push our efforts two steps backward. I cannot believe this colossal clownishness. Any sane person knows that if I had my druthers, God would never have had the opportunity to destroy the natural beauty of our parks and forests. As it stands, God never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. He presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, he seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that his goal is to cause headstrong subversion to gather momentum on college campuses. This is abject favoritism! Truth be told, I aver that the best way to overcome misunderstanding, prejudice, and hate is by means of reason, common sense, clear thinking, and goodwill. God, in contrast, believes that we can stop particularism merely by permitting government officials entrée into private homes to search for out-of-touch lamebrains. The conclusion to draw from this conflict of views should be obvious: The law of self preservation dictates that I call your attention to the problem of immature derelicts. And I can say that with a clear conscience because God wonders why everyone hates him. Apparently, he never stopped to think that maybe it's because I cannot promise not to be angry at him. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me -- as it leads God -- to deliver an additional blow to dignity and self-worth. My next point of order is that God likes to compare his obloquies to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. This is a frightening realization. The reason is clear. Some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with callow braggadocios on a regular basis at work or in school. We, therefore, may be able to gain some insight into the way they think, into their values; we may be able to understand why they want to redefine humanity as alienated machines/beasts and then convince everyone that they were never human to begin with.
So let me make it clear that if anything, God wants to break up society's solidarity and cohesiveness. Faugh. He flaunts his personal politics and attitudes in front of everyone else. Natural law is therefore the fulcrum upon which rests the case that I undeniably hope you're not being misled by the "new God". Only his methods and tactics have changed. God's goal is still the same: to create an ideological climate that will enable him to advocate soporific wheelings and dealings. That's why I'm telling you that we must definitely discuss the advantages of two-parent families, the essential role of individual and family responsibility, the need for uniform standards of civil behavior, and the primacy of the work ethic. Does that sound extremist? Is it too conceited for you? I'm sorry if it seems that way, but that's life. In closing, God has been, still is, and always will remain more abusive than piteous fruitcakes.
Best Regards,
Omnislash
It's unlikely that this letter will win me many friends or even garner much attention. However, writing it is the only way I know to plant markers that define the limits of what is mingy and what is not. In the rest of this letter, I will use history and science (in the Hegelian sense) to prove that God's votaries would sooner ally with evil than oppose it. God is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, he has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people he desires to lead.
God has been deluding people into believing that the best way to serve one's country is to infiltrate the media with the express purpose of disseminating obscene information. Don't let him delude you, too. Something recently occurred to me that might occur to God, as well, if he would just turn down the volume of his voice for a moment: I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for God's subterfuge. I'm absolutely stunned. I may not believe that there's no difference between normal people like you and me and coldhearted hostes generis humani, but I honestly do think that he should learn to appreciate what he has instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he wants, every time he wants to. Will God's unsavory pals impose a narrow theological agenda on secular society? Only time will tell.
Even without the scary ideology of authoritarianism in the picture, we can still say that we can't afford to be so self-serving in such difficult times. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is that he has been known to say that people are pawns to be used and manipulated. That notion is so stolid, I hardly know where to begin refuting it. God knows how to lie. It's too bad he doesn't yet understand the ramifications of lying. Nevertheless, his faculty for deception is so far above anyone else's, it really must be considered different in kind as well as in degree.
The comparison between God and peremptory, vitriolic bums is remarkable, but given the way things are these days, we must remember that if you ever ask God to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. Pardon my coarse language, but if he can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to his lackadaisical, longiloquent prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Unholy Rhetoric. In the meantime, God has been offering disloyal scofflaws a lot of money to revive an arcadian past that never existed. This is blood money, plain and simple. Anyone thinking of accepting it should realize that God's sympathizers are unified under a common goal. That goal is to destroy everything beautiful and good.
When I observe God's peons' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like him, they all want to irrationalize thinking on every issue. Also, while a monkey might think that God's zingers are not worth getting outraged about, the fact remains that when I was a child, my clergyman told me, "God's adept at spinning lies." If you think about it you'll see his point. God's slurs promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for God's spin doctors because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to God. In order for us to realize more happiness in our lives, we need to understand that it is pointless to fret about the damage already caused by his disdainful hijinks. The past cannot be changed. We must cope with the present if we hope to affect our future and work together towards a shared vision. What does God have to say about all of this? The answer, as expected, is nothing.
If the past is any indication of the future, God will once again attempt to prime the pump of credentialism. I don't think it is a mere coincidence that his pronouncements are not normal, but that's really beside the point. He claims that everything is happy and fine and good. I would say that that claim is 70% folderol, 20% twaddle, and 10% another wretched attempt to ascribe opinions to me that I don't even hold. It's possible that God doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of quislingism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we bring meaning, direction, and purpose into our lives.
One can predict on empirical grounds that eventually God will wage an odd sort of warfare upon a largely unprepared and unrecognizing public. But even if we disregard all that and examine only his benighted, vile expositions, this seems to me to be enough to show that it's possible that he exhibits the sensitivity of a bulldozer. However, I cannot speculate about that possibility here because I need to devote more space to a description of how God's backers are merely ciphers. God is the one who decides whether or not to violate the basic tenets of journalism and scholarship. God is the one who gives out the orders to base racial definitions on lineage, phrenological characteristics, skin hue, and religion. And God is the one trying to conceal how it's ethically bankrupt for him to reduce us to acute penury. Or perhaps I should say, it's crass. To parody the old song, "Fish gotta swim, God gotta crush people to the earth and then claim the right to trample on them forever because they are prostrate." There are some simple truths in this world. First, he utilizes a narrow and static view of human nature. Second, there is much more of this to come. And finally, documents written by his operatives typically include the line, "God's ventures are good for the environment, human rights, and baby seals", in large, 30-point type, as if the size of the font gives weight to the words. In reality, all that that fancy formatting really does is underscore the fact that God possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, he can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it.
Granted, God's forces form a raucous organization devoted to harassment and barratry. But God wants to pit the haves against the have-nots. Such intolerance is felt by all people, from every background.
God's list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that he seizes every opportunity to push our efforts two steps backward. I cannot believe this colossal clownishness. Any sane person knows that if I had my druthers, God would never have had the opportunity to destroy the natural beauty of our parks and forests. As it stands, God never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. He presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, he seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that his goal is to cause headstrong subversion to gather momentum on college campuses. This is abject favoritism! Truth be told, I aver that the best way to overcome misunderstanding, prejudice, and hate is by means of reason, common sense, clear thinking, and goodwill. God, in contrast, believes that we can stop particularism merely by permitting government officials entrée into private homes to search for out-of-touch lamebrains. The conclusion to draw from this conflict of views should be obvious: The law of self preservation dictates that I call your attention to the problem of immature derelicts. And I can say that with a clear conscience because God wonders why everyone hates him. Apparently, he never stopped to think that maybe it's because I cannot promise not to be angry at him. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me -- as it leads God -- to deliver an additional blow to dignity and self-worth. My next point of order is that God likes to compare his obloquies to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. This is a frightening realization. The reason is clear. Some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with callow braggadocios on a regular basis at work or in school. We, therefore, may be able to gain some insight into the way they think, into their values; we may be able to understand why they want to redefine humanity as alienated machines/beasts and then convince everyone that they were never human to begin with.
So let me make it clear that if anything, God wants to break up society's solidarity and cohesiveness. Faugh. He flaunts his personal politics and attitudes in front of everyone else. Natural law is therefore the fulcrum upon which rests the case that I undeniably hope you're not being misled by the "new God". Only his methods and tactics have changed. God's goal is still the same: to create an ideological climate that will enable him to advocate soporific wheelings and dealings. That's why I'm telling you that we must definitely discuss the advantages of two-parent families, the essential role of individual and family responsibility, the need for uniform standards of civil behavior, and the primacy of the work ethic. Does that sound extremist? Is it too conceited for you? I'm sorry if it seems that way, but that's life. In closing, God has been, still is, and always will remain more abusive than piteous fruitcakes.
Best Regards,
Omnislash
Back to Top