Entering the mall today, I ran across a trio of young college women. They were ambling down their path in that way peculiar to their genus. Each looked like an oblivious French dictator, marching with long strides, as sure as a soldier, as they eye fucked every person and object that was on display. Except, they never seemed to stare in the direction they were marching, as though a bullet to the head was not a sure probability. They were enamored with little, superficial things (that is their type’s goal: superficiality).
I often catch myself looking into a mirror, at my own dashing reflection, and surely what part of me that ‘catches’ the admiring attribute of my soul is the same part that caused me to participate in weekly mass. That is in fact where I sit now, on a hard wooden bench, with the hard words of the priest as a form of white noise to my writing. His name is John, but unlike his Christian predecessor of the same name, he is wearing a royal purple vestment and a tall royal priest hat-thing. You know, one of those caps that looks like the end of an uncircumcised penis. He is like a holy erection spewing forth the seed of renewal upon us sin ridden-whores, who listen raptly, on our knees like common sluts. I’ve never really cared much for mass, the entire ordeal is as palatable as a barbed enema, and I must be cleansed by this ancient torture ritual once a week at least. I must because a part of me knows that God exists, and therefore so does Jesus, and so did Moses. They have each in their own way told us how bad humanity is, how fucking wretched I am, and I just feel so dirty because I know this is true. I need to be cleansed, and the only method that works is this weekly enema. But unlike these guilty fools around me, I also use my time in church to fulfill my duty of weekly prayer, and I do this in writing. I write a confessional eulogy to my regrets.
I have never once entered the standard confessional box, you know, that little compartment where you tell your darkest sins to a man who is sitting behind a screen. I figure that all of that is merely a superficial middle-man to Jesus’ attention. I figured that although God was real, and that at one point he drowned the entire earth as a punishment of sins, the Catholic church had devised a method to interrupt man’s communication with the Father, under his nose, without causing him to sneeze. This method was exemplified by the row of velvet confessional boxes which stood like a platoon of accusatory old widows in the shadowy region to the left of the pew. For whatever reason, God had decided to allow the conduit to his non-Jewish children to corrupt from a divinely inspired institution to a gaudy guard house protected by Swiss soldiers wearing the most ridiculous get-up that the mind of man could conceive. For God so loved the Jews that he gave them the diaspora, and he so loved the rest of the world that he gave them Catholicism. Praise be to God, and it is now that I praise Him. I praise Him, the creator of circumstance and of the eternal recurrence of circumstances, because He represents what is noble, elegant, and true.
God, whom to me represents the acceptance of eternity, is an existential idea which preceded the Existentialists. The Existentialist is so because he realizes that God is either already dead or dying, but still esteems the ethos of eternity as worthy of consideration. He finds an existential way to deal with the problem of depression and eventual inward collapse: He damns up the river of regrets, and he forces one to look unswervingly at the truth.
Oddly, though I know of the concept of a God’s superficiality, I make the choice of participating in the weekly Catholic mass. Around me sit two-score and twenty thousand common folk who still interpret reality from the basis of an archaic myth. They smell like the Preferred Cologne of the Herd. A mixture of musk and alcohol. To whom do they sing their odes? To a deity which enshrines suffering as ideal, and pleasure as discord, guilt is the essence of Christian existence, and so it inspires regrets and mistakes. These people are so shallow that the genes which cause gregariousness are their inspiration to have faith. They are saved by social recognition from the socialite sheep which inhabit the shadowy regions below Jesus’ feet.
Well, I can only say that a really good idea needs a symbol, (look at the plethora of golden idols which sit gracefully on white marble cliffs along the nave of the church, each one being a symbol towards a really good idea), and Yahweh, as interpreted by some men a while ago, is my answer to this need. Why? Why not?
The final plateau on the track for Omniscience stands one level above Skepticism. The end all is not why, but why not. The response of ‘why not’ represents the absurdity of Skepticism, as nothing that exists can be self-renouncing, and a true skeptic seeks to renounce everything. Thus occurs the phenomenon, best labeled in its original Latin, as Reductio ad Absurdum.
The only actual being is in the present-and I currently sit with Yahweh and Esau, a few fat white neighbors, the local American Legion, and a negro-organ player with a false eye in Mass at St.Luke’s Holy Catholic Rapture Church of Amarillo, Texas. This church is the biggest and only air-conditioned structure in town. The A/c is said to be non-physical, a bestowal of release from Jesus. Every other edifice in town, including the welfare outpost, and the grocery store, are damned to eternal perdition for not be so structurally designed as the Church. The citizens of this dust-bowl do not quarrel with the mad ecclesiast who spews such vomit, for they truly come for the a/c, and if that be Jesus, then praise Him. The grocery store and the Barber should only focus on praising Him too, so that at least nobody gets sweaty as they die from deprivation.
Hell is the greatest yoke ever created by mankind: it has led to the conformity of billions of men. Still, in this age of Science, most men are led to act in such a way so as to avoid perdition. Parents throughout the ages has found that the best method for teaching the child to quell his incessant ‘whys’ has been punishment, and master’s of slaves have also found that the only way to keep slaves in line has been by placing grave consequences upon even the least infringement, as states James Ramsey, “The ordinary punishments of slaves, for the common crimes of neglect, absence from work, eating the sugar cane, theft, are cart whipping, beating with a stick, sometimes to the breaking of bones, the chain, an iron crook about the neck… a ring about the ankle, and confinement in the dungeon. There have been instances of slitting of ears, breaking of limbs, so as to make amputation necessary, beating out of eyes, and castration” Such devastating punishments ward off the future act of rebellion. Knowledge of this led Napoleon to assert that —-. It is the nature of humanity to avoid that which is painful, and that which leads to pain, it has thus been an effective strategy of the ruling class to conjoin rebellion with pain in the minds of the ruled. Now I must say it loud, and against the screams of the majority: Hell is the whip of the priest. Hell is the threat of the brand, of the cross. Hell is the chain, the guillotine by which the priest’s ideology gains authority and sanctity.
Euphoric fields of the utmost delight
The social serum makes our laughter ignite
serum intermingled with blood
what arises is no greater than mud
We all danced before the deluge
now we seek but fail to find refuge
quiet your volcanic cries
and wipe your effusively tearful eyes
For God is dead, and death is nigh
A legion of faithful sheep will attest to the incongruity of this title. These many would attempt to correct me, saying, “ O, son, I think ya made a misstake and fergot to add the a- in front of that theism werd their.” Or,“We sa jus little sheeps on da pasture following our savia wit grace and love.” But, despite the subtle perception of theistic worship(in all its shades), I have not made a mistake, and I will attempt, in the sentences that follow, to bring the reader behind that thin veil of piety which shrouds these believers in sanctity, and seems to make their beliefs off-limits to the illuminating light of critical reasoning. I will also take on the task of showing that, since atheism is a merely an effect of the reasoning faculty, it is entirely just.
In order to develop an accurate concept of the opponent, I will give an accepted and relevant definition of theism. Theism is the belief that there is a god or gods which created the universe, its laws, and its life, and that these god/gods play an active part in reality; having a will which can be adhered to, being able to perform capricious miracles, and harboring a care for mankind. Theism colors its gods in the light of kings and despots; bestowing a few morsels of their infinite wealth upon those within their court who kiss their ass the most, calling this grace, and punishing those who do not bend and salute every waking second of their life to them by punishments varying in violence from death of a first born, to eradication by fire. Any lesser definition of god/gods is not theism, rather pantheism, or a deism of some sort.
A search of theology for answers pertaining to the existence of Yahweh or Zeus will only find vague trails of base logic into forests of loose concepts. Out of this forest these scavengers contend that they have found irrefutable evidence for the existence of their Yahweh.The theist apologists of yesterday and today have a devious method of ‘proving’ their Yahweh, or their Allah, through simplistic algorithms which, at best, only leaves the possibility of a pantheistic god of sorts, some impersonal entity incapable of miracles, some first cause, which could just as well have a cause itself. They jump from the assumptions arrived at through the Cosmological Argument, for instance, and say that the uncaused cause, must be Yahweh. Well, I can make an equally foolish jump and say that the uncaused cause was a flying bowl of tuna, and that we should thus worship that fish, that we should sacrifice everything to that fish, or else burn unto eternity. This jump, though, would be arrogant, it would constitute an overstep of reason, and as soon as I believe that my tuna is absolute truth to everyone equally I become an arrogant priest. What makes my tuna religion any different than Christianity, or Islam, or Judaism, or Zoroastrianism, or Hinduism, accept the lack of millions of tuna worshiping adherents?
Any person who believes that this jump is justified, who makes this jump, whether with knowledge or due to ignorance, and who evangelizes that this nether region of logic is truth, is fitting of the label ‘Arrogant’. (Arrogance being here defined as an offensive display of superiority or self-importance; an over bearing pride.) They have to believe that the universe revolves around planet Earth, and that the world revolves around man, and they have to found their beliefs on their perceived capability to know truth without external evidence. This is Narcissism, arrogance, hubris, and, of course, as true as a pile of horse-shit is palatable, despite the masquerading and pious facade of the believer.
Conversely, atheism is a scion, not of an overarching arrogance such as birthed theism, but of pure reasoning. Reason being that faculty which, through incremental steps, scales the mountains of obscurity and declares, upon the peaks, “Men do live on the antipode, the Pope be damned.”Atheism negates man’s immortality, it does not enfranchise morality, it says the universe is cold and impersonal, and it does not attempt to describe the ineffable. An atheist simply states that, in light of the lack of evidence for, and the piles of evidence against, I cannot honestly believe in a theistic, personal god. Now one must here question with the same integrity whether this is arrogance, or something closer on the spectrum to piety.
Does the atheist overstep the capabilities of logic? Must he take the form of a lion, destroying and devouring all opposition, in order to spread his ‘truth’?Does he formulate a region of demons and unquenchable fires which is reserved for all those who believe in a theistic god? Must he commit to a holy war, where men kill and rape righteously, in order to gain a parcel of land that he deems holier than any other piece of land? The atheist, in most cases, is willing to receive criticism of his behavior and his beliefs, he believes in the accuracy of the scientific method, and concomitantly he understands that any personal conviction which doesn’t stem from empiricism is likely frivolous. Does this sound like the behavior of an arrogant person? Conversely, the theist is convinced of the truth of his perception even though such perception lacks an external origin. A believer in religious myth will say that the evidence lies within. They agree that their reasoning is subjective, but assert arrogantly that their paradigm conforms exactly to the objective universe. Does this sound like a portrayal of humility? I leave this to the reader to decide.
IF you dig deep enough into the soft, though repulsively odoriferous mud of ignorance which all truth is buried in, you will uncover small pieces of reality, and you will invariably throw these away from you for they emanate a stench far worse than the mud they were hidden in……Truth stinks: it offends every sense. Happiness is not produced from understanding, in fact, happiness is the favorite child of ignorance. So, my friend, if it is happiness you seek: STOP DIGGING FOR TRUTH, and merely lay your head upon the foundation of ignorance and stare into the clouds. Make this cloud look like a funny clown, and that one a benevolent god. Sleep comfortably in your illusion until death whisks you off into eternity, for felicity’s sake!
I only ask that you do not waste the resources of the scientist and the psychologist, who seek truth: for their discoveries are what keeps you dreamers dreaming. They develop the medicines, and they build the tools which accommodate your slumber. So, do not, for the sake of your own ignorance (happiness) attempt to say that your cloud mirages are real and consequential and monarchical, and creating, and worthy of the first fruits of Man, else you feel the effects of the hammer of reason upon your myths.