I don’t believe in that god either


No, am not religious.

I often write about religion and that means sometimes am going to write about god[s]. I know you this what you don’t know is every so often a believer tells me the god I have written isn’t their god. They will tell you that even them don’t believe the god you have described. I’m an igtheist when it comes to the discussion about gods. Today we are not talking about me, but will respond to Giles Fraser who in a Guardian article says he doesn’t believe in the god Stephen Fry described.

Fraser tells us many people think of god as synonymous with power. I don’t know about you, but it would be plain to anyone with an iota of common sense that a being that to create the vastness that is the universe needed only to say let there be and it was, is a being with immense power.

But Fraser wants to change all that. He writes

This is why the Jesus story is, for me, the most theologically revolutionary story that there can be. Because it imagines God and power separated. God as a baby. God poor. God helpless on a cross. God with a mocking and ironic crown of thorns. In these scenes it is Caesar who has the power.

That maybe, but this god was born of a virgin, makes water into wine, feeds thousands on a loaf of bread, calms the sea and resurrects from the dead. If this is not a show of power, I don’t know what is. Let us not forget this god could have chosen to forgive humanity without suicide by centurion. It doesn’t move us to imagine god instead of using his power to forgive power, chose to die to save us from himself. Only unimaginative people think this is the greatest story ever told.

Fraser wants us to imagine god as love only. He writes

Furthermore, this powerless thing subverts Fry’s accusation of God’s iniquity. For if we are imagining a God whose only power, indeed whose only existence, is love itself – and yes, this means we will have to think metaphorically about a lot of the Bible – then God cannot stand accused as the cause of humanity’s suffering.

and who cares about a suffering god. Who wants such a god? How many believers worship a suffering god, a god who is hungry, a good who is homeless, a good who is powerless? By a show of hands please, am counting. And when we start to think metaphorically about the bible, does this apply to the book or just sections of it. Fraser doesn’t tell us where to stop with metaphors.

We must ask Fraser why he thinks his definition of god as a suffering god is the one every other believer worships. There are those who believe in a vengeful and powerful god, are they mistaken?

Fraser wants us to believe that the god Fry was answering is the celestial teapot made famous by philosopher Bertrand Russell. It doesn’t need hard work to find the god of the bible being capricious, mean minded, tribal and many other negative qualities.

Fraser tells us god is

is the story of human dreams and fears. God is the shape we try to make of our lives. God is the name of the respect we owe the planet. God is the poetry of our lives. Of course this is real.

and me wonders who goes to church to pray to the shape of samosas, respect and so on. This is as nebulous as a god can be. And it is for this reason theists keep saying that isn’t my god you are talking about. They have redefined it to mean anything they want it to mean. On the first day, man created god and he has since been working to define it coherently.

 

Advertisements

About makagutu

As Onyango Makagutu I am Kenyan, as far as I am a man, I am a citizen of the world

68 thoughts on “I don’t believe in that god either

  1. aguywithoutboxers says:

    Interesting thoughts, my Nairobi brother. If this supposed deity is truly unconcerned about power, why are his devoted followers so obsessed with it? Why does this omnipotent being arbitrarily distribute disasters and suffering as “just” punishments for suspected transgressions? If this rumored deity is indeed about love, why are his followers so consumed by hatred and judgment on others who disagree with their beliefs. If this deity isn’t able to compel the believers to adhere to doctrine, how is one able to believe the belief system is valid?

    Good job, my friend! Have a fantastic weekend! Much love and naked hugs! 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  2. It is easy to dismiss power when you’re omnipotent. And it is easy to call manipulation love when you’re afraid.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. john zande says:

    I’m surprised this Fry interview has generated so much chatter. It’s good, great even, but I’m still left a little baffled as to why when there is so much more better material in circulation that really, really, really pokes the theists’ perceptions in the eye.

    I do though love the way Fraser has ignored the suffering of animals.

    Like

  4. “Fraser wants us to imagine god as love only.” If this is true, then he’s created a god different than the one[s] in the bible. God as love alone is not the Judao-Christian god. Perhaps he hasn’t read his bible. Nice discussion, Mak. And, I agree, christians read the bible and make it mean whatever they want it to.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. archaeopteryx1 says:

    On the first day, man created god and he has since been working to define it coherently.” – In His own image?

    Sounds like Mr. Fraser is describing god light.

    Like

  6. ” and yes, this means we will have to think metaphorically about a lot of the Bible ”

    except that bit about Jesus Christ being real. ooooh, that is the TRUTH.

    Fraser is one more Sophisticated Theologian who makes his god vaguer and vaguer too ignore the fact that he’s worshipping nothing more than a bronze age god just like Zeus or Odin.

    Like

  7. ladysighs says:

    I read that same article. Gets so tiring.

    Like

  8. The same pathetic attempt to make Christianity palatable, by stripping it of its core, which is the threat of eternal damnation for the unrepentant. It is cosmetic version of the real hell and brimstone, preying on the emotionally unstable, the guilty and the weak. You see Judaism doesn’t understand love as Christianity has reshaped it, but as an act of submissive obedience to the Law. Most of the non Pauline letters keep it the same. But Judaism was meant for free men, while Christianity was meant to keep the conquered masses and slaves under control, which could be achieved only by a compensatory system. That’s “love”…

    Like

    • And another bad thing about christians is they couldn’t make a decent matzo ball soup if their life depended on it.

      Like

    • makagutu says:

      I think christianity offers a good manual for making men slaves

      Like

      • It’s been designed as such by the 3rd century’s clergy in exchange for emperor Constantine’s (not Keanu R.) favours, aka state religion status and virtually unlimited power.
        This is why from a clearly messianic Jewish sect, it’s been adapted into a neo-pagan, anti-Semitic imperial religion.

        Like

        • makagutu says:

          You would think the educated and the sophisticates among them would be busy pointing such things out. They are all busy selling snake oil to the ignorant masses. How pathetic

          Like

          • The edusophisticated are either raised as children to believe, and therefore are conditioned to a certain degree, and/or end up trapped by rhe same cicle of guilt relief which is key to the propagation of this religion. The absolute majority have no idea about being enslaved by one of the oldest mass control systems. Most graduates like myself, know that there are major credibility issues, but out of an unconscious fear chose to live a double life, trying to grasp what they consider still good in it and emphasize it like your example. Many of my former colleagues still hang on a last thread, namely “since there’s at least a chance of all being somewhat true, is it worth risking eternity on the wrong side?”
            And for them, not even the daily proofs of injustice, suffering, etc is enough to make them take their doubts into consideration.
            How gratifying and self-fulfilling is to offer prayers to the loving god on behalf of those millions of suffering innocents, ignoring all sane proofs that if such a good would exist, Hitler and Mengele put together wouldn’t be enough to match such a horrific criminal…

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            Thanks Rom. Indoctrination of babes keeps even educated adults believing crazy. You have said this so well and eloquently.

            Like

          • archaeopteryx1 says:

            The absolute majority have no idea about being enslaved by one of the oldest mass control systems.

            “One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. it is simply too painful to acknowledge — even to ourselves — that we’ve been so credulous. “
            — Carl Sagan —

            Like

          • makagutu says:

            Sagan hit the mark with that statement

            Like

          • Hi Arch, you’ve got no idea how painfully true this becomes as a sequel to “been there, done that”…

            Like

          • archaeopteryx1 says:

            I’m sure that’s true.

            Like

  9. Arkenaten says:

    These people are farking idiots of the nth degree.
    This video is going bonkers among Christians – check out the number of blogs on it. Stephen Fry was being ironic of course and simply pandering to the stupid interviewer. It made good TV and I am sure the producer was happy BUT as soon as Fry attempted to answer the question he left himself wide open to farking idiots like this Frasier bloke … He should have cut straight to the quick and said ”This will never happen as I don’t believe in god. Yours or anyone else’s. It s a stupid question.”
    Sadly this doesn’t make good television though, does it!
    Good post Mak.

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      ”This will never happen as I don’t believe in god. Yours or anyone else’s. It s a stupid question

      You are right this isn’t good for TV.
      Most of the blogs dedicated to responding to that 2 minutes clip by theists are so bad you think it was typed by a child. They make no sense

      Liked by 1 person

  10. I think you’ve nailed it nicely here Mak. Not that any theists would agree with you …

    Like

  11. emmylgant says:

    Your conclusion is spot on Noel. Great post and, as usual, very entertaining follow up! I love you guys! Don’t ever shut up.

    Like

  12. God is first of all about power. This is what makes him different than any other biological organism. He has extraordinary power that lifts him above and makes him special. Are there any examples of deities that have no power but are worshipped anyway?

    I’d say the story of Christ is still about power. It’s not a power that makes you defeat your enemy, but one that leaves you invincible. Christ came back from the dead, after all. The crucifixion wasn’t enough (I’m not an expert though. Correct me if I’m wrong).

    Fraser’s comments are generally incoherent. If anything, he doesn’t describe God exactly but just ‘all good things’. It reads like cute poetry, but that’s it.

    Like

We sure would love to hear your comments, compliments and thoughts.

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