|Toxic Drums • Home • Book Reviews • Site Navigation • Contact • Blog|
|See also: • For God's sake let's get real • The Ichthys fish • Magnetic Morality • Good God the Oppressor|
|See also: • UK budget 2009 • Ten billion cows • Do Aliens Wear Ties? for arbitrary links relating to "stupidity".|
God won't save stupid people!
It was reported in the Daily Telegraph on Thursday 26 March 2009 that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams had said that the Earth is now facing a "whole range of doomsday prospects from climate change to the destruction of delicate ecosystems and even attack from bio-terror weapons." (see: the Archbishop on global change) Apparently he went on to say that God is not going to intervene and protect the human race as we have a "terrible freedom" to decide our own destiny.
Hmm. Very provocative to one such as me. Where do people get the idea that they can "believe" in a God of their own description and choosing who is all powerful, all loving, quite capable of intervening but hey, he's not going to save you stupid lot! Unless, of course, you choose to follow my own particular brand of fantasy. (Which, of course, inevitably, and already proven, would not actually bear any fruit anyway.)
The Archbishop, with the greatest respect, should get up and do what his God wants. He should make it explicit that God does not exist and that he has spent his life supporting a delusion [see: The God Delusion] for his own sense of security. He has the "terrible freedom" to which he refers but he dare not take it. His "God" is an institution of perverted human intellectual spaghetti. It is the maintenance of an authoritarian power structure that has got us into this mess in the first place. I am absolutely sure that the Archbishop is a jolly nice fellow and thinks very deeply on a lot of very important matters but no matter how deep he goes to justify and logically rationalise his delusion it doesn't change the fact that the institution to which he belongs not only has a clear history of bizarre destruction and damage but it continues to behave in a simply un-Christ like way.
On the claims of climate change sceptics the Archbishop said "Rhetoric (as King Canute demonstrated) does not turn back rising waters." I would suggest that "rhetoric" doesn't change reality. And pertinently I mean that no amount of "rhetoric" makes the nuclear weapons in his country acceptable. No amount of "rhetoric" makes his prancing about in robes lording it over the population Christ like. No amount of "rhetoric" makes him correct in his supporting and heading up an organisation that upholds the materialistic and consumer based laws and culture that cause these "stupid" humans to behave in such an aberrant way as to be destroying the very environment they depend on.
I've seen this too often before. I recall being somewhat confused when I was young by the church locking the poor box and locking the doors of the church at night in case they get robbed. But that is just the beginning of the "It's mine!" mentality. Justified with the sanctimonious rubbish about the Christians doing good by collecting the money for the poor but the "Christians" have got a nice big church and a lot of dosh and most of the congregation are wealthy middle class people holding on to their "It's mine!" stuff as if a piece of paper or a man made "law" somehow makes it right. But it is really not alright to justify everything with complex rationalisation and by writing laws that are too complex to make sense. Personally I am close to not worrying any more whether the human race continues or not. I am close to not worrying if billions (and billions will) die in pain. Not because I am heartless but perhaps for the very opposite reason. I am no longer so deluded by my own insecurity and fear. I watch the human race doing it's most terrible dance of death with a deep sadness in my heart but a sincere lack of sentimentalisation.
When a supposedly holy man says what the Archbishop has said, the first thing I recognise is the judgemental, conditional, authoritarian, oppression of the very way he frames what he sees. They are not kind words. I happen to have been brought up as a Christian and pretty seriously too. I happen to believe in 90% or more of the good stuff in Christianity and I'll tell you this, our job (so to speak) is not to go around telling other people that they should be like the Jesus we love and admire (to the point of raising him to the dizzy heights of a God (can you believe that?)) but that we should "be" like him. Now just conjure up an image of that bloke represented in the gospels and by the Christian churches and imagine him, Jesus Christ, saying that God won't save you from your own stupidity. I don't think so. Unfortunately the Archbishop has got a severe paradox on his hands. But there is a simple way out of it. Get real. I think there is something to be said for the notion that one thing Jesus was clear about and that is that we are real. It's not about trying to make rules and then carrying them out mindlessly and without a heart.
So long as you are so afraid of dying that you have to invent a safe haven after death you cannot deal with the reality of this transient experience we call life.
We live in a blame culture and the Archbishop lives his life very carefully avoiding being able to be blamed. But he is sitting in his ivory tower suggesting that others are to blame for the mess. But when he finally gets it he will realise that no amount of childish "It wasn't me it was him" will save the world or his sorry a*** from a painful and meaningless death. I bet he will sit there pontificating about the terrible things that people do in his secure little job with all his material needs and aspirations being satisfied whilst billions of people starve around the world and there is war and destruction [see: Trafigura] all around the planet.
The very worst people I have encountered in this life of mine are the one's who are so desperate to "appear" to conform [see: Do aliens wear ties?]. They are the armies that carry out the warped and perverted intentions of the few. Although this might sound like a personal attack on the Archbishop it is rather an attack on the ludicrous position necessarily taken up by the role he sits in.
Perhaps he would be better off pointing out that he is very sad to see the desperate situation that currently faces humanity. Perhaps if people could experience more love and more support for themselves and if they could be encouraged to experience their lives in the pure authenticity of being human. Perhaps if they were allowed to be themselves and were encouraged to delight in the absolute brilliance of being human [see: Educating Children]. Then perhaps they would be able to do what human beings do so well and turn the situation around and to create a sustainable, supporting environment for all life to thrive in. [see: Poverty is an Injustice]
In his Christian terms he should try actually believing in this God of his. He should try realising that God did make us how we are and we are fantastic. He should do what I am sure he "thinks" he does and he should "trust" in this God of his. He should try believing in God. What sort of arrogance is it to portray a super human, benign, all powerful creator who prizes love above all things who created us but the Archbishop can tell us that God won't save us from our own stupidity? What sort of turn around is that? What sort of arrogance is it? God made the Archbishop alright (cos he's a jolly good fellow) but the rest of us? Well if we are so stupid God ain't gonna bother saving us. We're just stupid. Not worth saving really. Well we didn't do what he wanted us to do. We were naughty. We deserve what we get. Like all those kids in Gaza I suppose. I mean, how stupid of them to be Palestinians [see: The Myths of Zionism]. They really should have known better and been Israelis. What? Me angry?
And I'll say this: The Archbishop's robes and his position and his wealth are incompatible with the teachings of Jesus. But they always have a "Yes but..." answer. Well if we didn't protect Christianity then the opponents would destroy it. There's always the point that someone has to print the bible and distribute it. They need a printing press and we need churches and clergy otherwise we wouldn't be able to convey the good news. And to save our people we can build weapons because we are the God fearing good people on the planet. Hmmm. Why didn't Christ get off the cross then? In fact there were a heap of compromises that he could have taken along the way to have changed the story radically and to have been a very comfortable, admired, materially wealthy and influential individual. Why did he die in the story? And if one really believes in him then there is no way one would ever take up arms against an enemy. But Christianity just has Jesus as a pantomime front end fantasy figure. The justification for war and aggression come from cherry picking all sorts of other books of the bible.
|See also: • ActionAid working to make poverty history • The God Delusion|