So (how can) you (still) believe … ?


“As you now acknowledge that the character, Jesus of Nazareth is a work of fiction why will you continue to use the term ”God Soft Hands Jesus”?”

Yes I will – and here is why …


Showdown with Holly, National Geographic Wild: Cesar Millan – Dog Whisperer

Words I heard:
“The brain has got stuck.”
“I didn’t see that coming.”
“She’s still not submissive?”
“Don’t worry, that’s my job”
“That’s why we’re here.”
“… why will you continue to use the term ”God Soft Hands Jesus”?”


Even a “definitive” yes or no answer brings derision from both sides. One side must submit. One side must win.  One side must be seen to win.  Each side cannot believe the other: “The brain has got stuck.”  Each side tries to catch the other off-guard: “I didn’t see that coming.” Each side has to win: “She’s still not submissive?” Each side uses the science of man and the science of god – because whoever can (elapsed time) outlast the other wins!  “Don’t worry, it’s our job – that’s why we’re here.” 

“… why will you continue to use the term ”God Soft Hands Jesus”?”

Is a great question!  Thank you.

God Soft Hands Jesus is my pencil sketch and I cannot draw very well.  So I use words of something deep down inside where only I can see, feel, touch, smell, hear, taste and converse (and if you wish to test that as just a “chemical equation” please don’t slice me open).

But I am not unique

We all live in this world. We are of this world.  We are all shaped and shaved by our living. We all pursue what motivates us (to pursue what motivates us).  We are all shaped by fact and fiction. We are all shaved by truth and deception. We all have a strong sense of survival. We all need a strong sense of survival. We are taught survival is not being submissive – not backing down – not letting anyone get one over on us (not unless they are bigger than us).

Enter religion’s version of God.

The Alpha Male.  The Master of the Universe.  The He who must be obeyed. The He who will keep us safe. The He who will protect us.  The He we cannot see but is everywhere – who we sell our soul to – who delivers good things in return – because He is the “He of Love” – but He is the “He of Death” as well – which is where the “obey and worship” come in … Hello church …

So often the never-never paying for the ever-ever

Then He lets us down. He doesn’t deliver. He allows bad things to happen.  We are doing our bit, and He isn’t.  He lets people die.  And suffer.  And be in pain.  He bites the hand that feeds (or whichever way around that should be). And we can’t fight back.  After all there is no “God” – not one I can prove. So I am angry at something I no longer believe exists!  Which is a real bummer!  But I can fight you.  I can take it out on those who “still believe” – who also let me down.   Who tricked me.. That I can do.  And I do do.

Is that called transference?

So believe me when I say I can outlast you!   Because I am not angry – but I am going to destroy your belief in this vile God – I am going to cast out this “god” like …. and demons … and … crap!


“The brain has got stuck.”
“I didn’t see that coming.”
“She’s still not submissive?”
“Don’t worry, that’s my job”
“That’s why we’re here.”
“… why will you continue to use the term ”God Soft Hands Jesus”?”


Ark, I use that phrase because GSHJ is an amalgam of goodness.  Something that is a part of me – that doesn’t need the bible – didn’t need the bible long before the bible and this “historically reliable”.

And now I can say aloud that the bible is not proven “historically accurate” for me … I am even freer to love because it cannot be a job – not even a (fact based) belief – “we” have just “proved that”.

So I don’t need to win.  Because what would I be “winning”?  So I don’t need to side with anyone anymore.  There are no sides anymore.  This is bigger than all of that.  And GSHJ is my shorthand for all of that.

So just why would I want to stop using “the term”?

.

And I really hope this (whole) post works for you.

Paul

.

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “So (how can) you (still) believe … ?

  1. I’ve read contributions over the past few days and feel verbally punch drunk before the day starts! Very interesting exchanges has just given me some disjointed thoughts:
    1. I like listening to a piece of music. If I
    analyse each note and sequence, it may be quite instructive and even interesting – but in the process I have will have reduced the beautiful, evocative melody to a string of constructs. Sometimes I think we tend to do the same with our faith. We have the intention of gaining greater understanding but end up losing something of the substance – a bit like trying to catch bubbles!
    2. Some comments over the past few days remind me of Thomas not accepting Jesus’s resurrected existence until he had direct, personal, physical evidence. Him receiving that didn’t define Jesus but helped determine Thomas’s understanding of his faith. Our faith is not only defined but is determined by our recognition of real encounter with the living Jesus in our daily life. Jesus is not defined by what is written in that historic ‘work of fiction’ but by the continuing combined revelation of his character that we each gain day by day. Our God of revelation! Blessings to all.

    • I’m sorry Keith but you seem to have missed the crux …. the host has at last recognised that the bible is untrustworthy, unreliable and the character Jesus of Nazareth is a narrative construct – a work of fiction.
      So any encounter you claim to have had carries about as much weight as having a tete a tete with Harry Potter.

      Analogies don’t work any more.
      The biblical character, Jesus is out with the garbage.

      • Keith follows by email but does not receive comment updates that I am aware of.

        (is it performing when one comments always mindful of the lurkers? A performance rather than a sincere sharing … ? If so – that would explain so much about these circular conversations you enjoy.)

        • Not really. I write in the moment as it were, and only consider ”others” usually only after I press send.

          Although I readily admit, that, on occasion, during a ”heavy” dialogue I will sometimes phrase my questions to demonstrate the sheer intransigence of the other writer.
          And before you ask, no, I have not felt the desire to do that here with you
          But maybe a little with Mel, whose sycophantic drivel quite frankly, irritates the shit out of me.

  2. So just why would I want to stop using “the term”?

    For the same reason you gave up sucking your thumb and the fluffy blanket with the bunnies on.
    And also, by not fully ”coming out ‘ ‘ your stance continues to offers a tacit head nod of acknowledgement about the character to those who claim to be followers.

    • Ark, you can suck the air out of a vacuum!

      Tomes don’t do it … Yes and no don’t do it … Allowing me to be me without any threat to you don’t do it … If I read you right: unless I take your side in everything on this topic of “religion”, then I am wrong and not too far from “vile” (and all that “fact based evidence stuff” with children).

      I look for love, not vile. That does not make me any lesser a seeker of the truth than you. But truth changes like everything changes. I choose NOT to look for vile because that sticks. Which is why I chose to look for love in everything because that sticks – and I prefer that sticking. And because we all make choices. You no less than me.

      So this post was about “choices” (we all make) – not just religion and deffo not about “coming out”.

      • It’s not about ”taking my side”.
        The evidence against any sort of veracity concerning the character Jesus of Nazareth demonstrates unequivocally that you are wrong, so don’t put your dithering over God Soft Hands Jesus on me, thank you very much for nothing.

        You look for love? Great! Then why use a vile fictional character as a vehicle to promote it?

          • vile
            vʌɪl/Submeter
            adjective
            extremely unpleasant.
            “he has a vile temper”
            synonyms: foul, nasty, unpleasant, bad, disagreeable, horrid, horrible, dreadful, abominable, atrocious, offensive, obnoxious, odious, unsavoury, repulsive, off-putting, repellent, revolting, repugnant, disgusting, distasteful, loathsome, hateful, nauseating, sickening; More
            morally bad; wicked.
            “as vile a rogue as ever lived”
            archaic
            of little worth or value.
            “all the feasts that thou hast shared erewhile, to mine shall be but vile”

            Which just about sums up the biblical god to a T don’t you think?

  3. Oh, and just to clarify. This is NOT about winning.
    Point scoring against the religiously indoctrinated is like a beating a cripple over a hundred metre dash.

    Helping people realise that belief in an imaginary friend and all the garbage that accompanies this ridiculous and harmful belief is something worthwhile.
    I approach this in my own way, recognizing that most believers are likely to double down whn confronted with evidence they do not like or simply cannot process.
    However, there are always one or two who will be prepared to listed, read carefully then go away and do the research.

    Someone who is having doubts about religion and god belief needs assurances that what they have been brought up to believe is the absolute truth is, in fact, just that!

    If this cannot be done with the same passion and conviction… backed by sound evidence and reasoning then it is not worthy of the time of day.

    And immediately you take the first step to truly understand the basis of religion and in this case Christianity you best be prepared to acknowledge you have been duped and misled, sometimes intentionally, . It takes almost no time at all to discover nothing about it holds water.

    As Asimov once noted: “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”

    Reality is much more fun!
    Peace.

        • I have always found that such a relationship works best when both come with an attitude of exploring. Or else it is very much the same kind of relationship as you experienced with religion. Oppressive.

          (just for any lurkers lurking out there)

          • Smile
            Oh, how presumptuous you are, Paul!
            I have never experienced oppression from religion.
            To me it is nothing but cultural nonsense.
            I only considered the negative implications of the brainwashing at every level, but especially in fundamentalism, once I began doing research for a novel that I wrote for I felt required at least a smattering of understanding of Moses, who I thought was a real historical character at that stage.
            Oh, how wrong was I!

            I was never involved with religion other than the occasional trip to church during Scout Parade.

            If one withes to explore, presumably with the intent to discover the truth of these issues then, in your case, you have to at least acknowledge that to hold on to past beliefs, even if they seem trivial, is an emotional crutch.
            Maybe you will eventually wean yourself off of them as well?
            But fr now, we have at least reached a point where we can see how unreliable is the bible and its central characters nothing but narrative constructs – work of geopolitical fiction.

            That is one hell of a big step and I’ll take it, no probs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s