Absurdism and Appendix-itus in Ecclesiastes

The Old Testament book of Ecclesiastes merits high marks in my opinion for its philosophical perspective of Absurdism, and its antidotal remedy of apathetic moderation.

The author of the early portion of Ecclesiastes is a realist, one who accepts the finite nature of all life, and thus one who realizes the futility in getting too caught up in the frustrating experience of the human condition. His acceptance of Absurdism as expressed in terms of “emptiness, emptiness, all is emptiness” could not have been expressed any clearer than by Camus; whereas his advised remedy “to eat, drink, and be happy” is Dudeism 101 as portrayed in “The Big Lebowski”.

Sadly enough, the afterthoughts of the author of the Appendix are a real buzzkill to the actual summary of the original author. The whole “fear God and keep his commandments for this is the whole duty of man” concept is the supplemental commentary of someone who read the text and realized that “alas, this ain’t theology”; and so with a few scratches of the pen, a wonderfully fulfilling humanist existential writing fell prey to your stereotypical theological indoctrinating humdrum.

If ever there was a case of literary homicide by Appendix-itus; then such is the case of the latter verses of the book of Ecclesiastes.

The original text of Ecclesiastes, as concluded in 12:8; offers such deep, real life existential insights, then only to be later diluted by the imaginative indoctrinating theology of a “text tamperer” in the verses that follow.

I suppose that such is only fitting when considered in the framework of the content and the message of the unknown, existential author of Ecclesiastes; “because sometimes a man who has toiled with wisdom, and knowledge, and skill must leave all to be enjoyed by a man who does not toil for it… and who knows whether he will be a wise man or a fool?”.

What a pity.

“Emptiness, emptiness, all is emptiness”…..

Advertisements

Damned To Pay Our Dues

Those who are born wealthy,
Use their money to stay wealthy.
Those who are born poor,
Work for money to be healthy.

A ceaseless quest,
To exploit Mother Earth.
Manufacture money from trees.
Then pretend there is a worth.

To a rectangular shred,
Manufactured and stamped.
To symbolize some value,
To we the living damned.

Damned to pay our dues,
For exploiting her so.
Damned to become earthworm feed,
And to help her flowers grow.

Reason and Compassion

There is a voice within,
Deliberating each moment.
The problem which is at hand,
Reasoning helps solve it.

There is a feeling within,
Which accompanies each encounter.
The older that I grow,
I’ve learned not to doubt her.

Reason and compassion,
Natural innate guides.
Experiences without.
Resolutions from inside.

On Compassion As A Moral Code

The intellect and sensitivity,
Natural guides for existential being.
Feelings are for ethical behavior,
The eyes are for the seeing.

Pain is bad,
Comfort is good.
Sensitivity is a guide,
To function as we should.

Why seek pain,
When comfort will do?
I have an aversion to suffering,
I can only assume the same for you.

The intellect and sensitivity,
Natural guides for existential being.
Compassion as a moral code,
The eyes are for the seeing.

The Second Coming of Jesus

While sitting on my deck today,
Enjoying the morning rain,
I had a weird thought,
Perhaps somewhat insane.

What would happen if one day,
Up there in Heaven yonder,
Jesus decided he’d had enough,
As on our deeds he pondered.

Would he turn to his left,
To look His Father in the eye.
And ask permission to depart,
From the sweet bye and bye.

And as he arose to split the scene,
Would he make this declaration:
“Got to go, Daddy-o,
To visit our favored nation!!”

So would he come to the USA,
This modern day Babylon,
To tune in to Faux News,
To hear the pundits babble on?

Or would he choose instead,
To visit that horrid place,
The secular pagan temple,
Of our entire race?

Yeah, would he go to Wall Street,
And rip up the ticker tape.
And overturn people’s desks,
As people stared and gaped?

And would he declare with anger,
As he looked into CEO’s eyes:
“Let not my Father’s world,
Be a mere place of merchandise!!”

And would he choose to dine,
With the President, and the First Lady.
Or would he rather keep company with,
Those whose character seems shady?

And would he heal the sick,
Oh, would he even dare!
To do the unthinkable,
By providing free health care?

And would he feed the masses,
The heathen and the slobs,
Or as he turned his back on them,
Would he say “Get a job!!”

And would his simple answer be,
When asked what he thought about Gays,
“I am no more hung up on that topic now,
Than I was in Biblical days”

And as he beheld bare mountain tops,
And saw the fracking of Mother Earth,
Would he appeal to our common sense,
For all that effort’s worth?

Or like that Indian in the commercial,
Back in the 1970’s.
Would Jesus be moved to shed a tear,
As his heart mourned woefully heavy.

And as he gathered his closest friends,
For his second grand ascent.
Would he speak of a spiritual kingdom,
Before away he went.

Or would he rather remind us all,
That existential is our being.
So we ought to try to alleviate,
All suffering that we are seeing.

Now, I readily admit,
These thoughts are pure speculation.
But I wonder what Jesus would do,
If he ever visited our nation?

On Our Innate Qualities Of Social Behavior

I find the following two common philosophies among many Christians disturbing:

1. That every person is born in sin.
2. And/or that humans are somehow incapable of distinguishing right from wrong on our own, without some external aid from a celestial deity.

I find both premises lack merit, and quite frankly make no sense.

Every thing that exists has principle and function.

A rock has the natural qualities of a rock, and albeit its function may be dormant; nonetheless the rock provides a surface for things of different qualities to rest upon. To that end the rock is naturally equipped.

A tree has the natural qualities of a tree, and among its functions are those of being a source of feeding and shade. To those ends the tree is naturally equipped.

Water has the natural qualities of water, and it functions to provide sustenance and life for many beings; including our own species. To a variety of such ends, water is naturally equipped.

Humans have the natural qualities of humanness, and among our functions is that of social behavior. To that end we humans are naturally equipped.

To conclude otherwise would make no sense.

How is that, that of all the myriad of things in all the universe, we; who appear to be of the highest degree of level of communication, creativity, and compassion; are somehow incapable of one of our most basic functions, that of social behavior, without some external aid of an alleged celestial deity?

I maintain that everything that naturally exists, is naturally equipped with certain distinctive qualities to function so as to effect certain basic principles, which are unique to each such thing.

To conclude otherwise with reference to a mere one among the incalculable things in all the known universe, simply makes no sense to me.

Hence I conclude, that we humans are naturally equipped with all necessary qualities to distinguish right from wrong, which is of course a most basic aspect of proper social behavior.

And thus my personal perspective is, that the cultivation of my natural qualities of goodness, is both the most natural of all endeavors, and the most noble of all efforts.

Why Do Atheists Debate The Topic of God

Today, I was challenged on a discussion board as to why we Atheists debate the topic of God, since we don’t believe in such. My response:

I can understand your perspective. There is a side of me that would just go on with my life and not ever address the topic. For those who do so, I tip my hat to them. But there are many reasons why I personally pursue the topic (I speak just for myself):

1. The concept of God has historically been a propaganda tool. I grew up learning about “Westward Expansion” and “Manifest Destiny'”; instead of being taught about imperialism, torture, enslavement, and genocide. To me, accurate history is important, hence a realistic perspective as to our national sins of the past 500 years will be helpful to hopefully guide us to a more humane way of life in the fortunately

2. In that regard, unfortunately, the concept of God is a contemporary political tool; both in our country and elsewhere. And when I say a political tool, I mean a tool which results in and which justifies inflicting suffering. So long as monotheism continues, then god might as well be alive to represent the nationalist zealots who support torture and killing in order to “protect their way of life’. If that “way of life” is perceived to be “God blessed”, then the concept of God is detrimental to peace, harmony, and good health.

3. People kill in the name of God. So long as the concept of God is unchecked, unaddressed, and unopposed, then people will go on killing in the name of their gods.

4. The concept of God is the justification for many racisms and bigotries. So long as there is homophobia and misogyny in the name of God, then the concept of God continues to play a role in subjugating minorities and justifying the denial of basic human rights to all.

Concl: The issue from my perspective regarding my personal quest to reason and dialogue regarding “god”; is not that which is not real (God); the issue is that which is all too real: Revisionist history, justified ongoing human atrocities in the way of war, murder, torture, homophobia, sexism, and many other such bigotries; IN THE NAME OF GODS.

So long as such continues, I personally feel morally obligated to to do what I can to reason against ignorance, and to attempt to be the best person I know how in the process.

The Gospel: A Terrorist’s Terms

One thing about the whole gospel message thing that does not add up. Always did bother me.

So the basic scenario; at least as I was taught it:

1. Sin is our own fault (even though god made us this way)

2. Death is the consequences of sin (but that’s not good enough, you have to be eternally tortured as well)

Now, when you start questioning the ethics of the God for creating a scenario which leads to sin and subsequent eternal torture, invariably you get the whole “well, God gives you the freedom to choose, because you are a free moral agent. So if you die in sin, then it’s no ones fault but your own”.

Choice. So God gave me a choice, did he?

Well. I don’t recall ever having a choice in whether I got to live in the first place.

I don’t recall ever having a pre-birth orientation explaining the full scenario, and being allowed to read the fine print before I signed on the dotted line and gave my free will consent to this arrangement.

And what is this arrangement? What details would I like to have been privy to before being thrust into this situation?

Well, let’s cut to the core, so to speak.

The arrangement per life is that you have a 50/50 shot at winning the Celestial Lottery, a grand sweepstakes at an all expenses prepaid stay at the Grand Heavenly Hotel; while the suckers in life who did not make the right choices will be eternally tortured in the dungeon below.

But don’t worry, the eternal torture chamber is sound proof, so the endless screams and agony of your friends and family members (perhaps even your own children) who made the wrong choices in life will not disturb the solace and serenity of eternal life in paradise with the other grand sweepstakes winners who were like you, and knew how to kiss up properly, and who were scholarly enough to know which holy book to believe in, and therefore you knew which deity’s butt to kiss sufficiently so as to be named a winner when the drawing took place.

No…..

I don’t recall having such an arrangement explained to me before giving my consent to live.

Hence, this 50/50 gamble was thrust upon me, even as I was thrust into this life involuntarily, and without giving my consent to such.

I don’t know about others.

But being thrust into such an arrangement hardly seems fair or even just to me.

And so as to the possibility of my being eternally tortured being my own fault because God gave me a free choice?

Poppycock!!

God never gave me, or anyone else a choice under such an arrangement.

God gave me a terrorist’s terms under such an arrangement.

And I don’t care much for being blackmailed by anyone.

And it is certainly not a matter of freedom of choice.

For if the terms would have been explained to me sufficiently, and had I been give the free will opportunity to choose to simply not live, then I would not be typing these words even now.

And so that is what bothers me about “the gospel”.

The gospel are a terrorist’s terms which dictate that I kiss his royal butt sufficiently, or be eternally tortured.

I am a victim of circumstances. And without giving my consent to such.

And so is everyone else.

That is: If the Bible is in fact true.