Categories: Blog Central, Feschuk on the famous

The most provocative blog post in the history of the Internets

God.
Discuss….

by Scott Feschuk on Friday, September 10, 2010 6:47pm - 0 Comments

God.

Discuss.

More by Scott Feschuk

We’re about to lead the G8 in ‘cuddly’

Scott Feschuk on how our prime minister is not afraid to exercise soft (and furry) power
Worried by sandwich-buying robots?

A review of the latest in robotics based on the Kill-Us-All-o-Meter
A painful shot to Google’s private parts

Scott Feschuk on Google’s potentially apocalyptic path to all-knowing corporate dictatorship

still.here

love it! they just can't let go…
RDB

It's hard to get death threats with a post like this. For that you need to say something about Allah.
PeteTong

Kristie Alley.
chet

God? Provocative?

Not really. People have been putting crucifixes in urine, smatteing feces on the virgin Mary etc for decades. The Buddist temples in Afghanistan have been levelled with no worldwide outcry, and the synagogues in the middle east raised to the ground have drawn barely a whisper?

Perhaps you are referring to the single act of burning a single Koran which drew massive outrage, intervention by the most powerful man in the world and a visit from the FBI?

Provocative in the sense that the mission of the Muslim brotherhood to bring compliance to Islamic norms within non believers worldwide has essentially been accomplished as evidenced by this latest sad display of capitualtion of the right to freedom of expression if it offends Islam (and only if it offends Islam)?

Let the world walk on egg shells and let the crime of being "offensive" forevermore supercede the right to express oneself, in order to appease Islam.

(P.S. flag burnings, bible burnings, arts displays depicting Jesus in bondage etc are all still OK. Only the highest order need be sacrosanct, that being Islam)
madeyoulook

Geez, kody, lighten up! It's Feschuk, for, um, somebody's or something's sake.
Kaplan

It's true. I can't walk for a block in any urban centre without stumbling tripping over plexiglass cases of crucifexes in urine, or statues of the virgin Mary "smattered" in feces. In some cities, they've actually replaced churches with gigantic fountains of urine! It's rather disturbing, but that's what you get when entire city councils are composed of the Muslim Brotherhood. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to check in to my neighborhoods mandatory flag burning ceremony.
Party_of_One

Whether or not "God" or "Gods" or "gods" exist is immaterial, actually. It's enough that the concept of "god" exists, a concept developed to provide explanations for the unknown, and to provide a "higher" authority or justification for the clearly fallible actions and decisions made by human beings.

If we could pretend, for a moment, that the concept didn't exist, it seems pretty clear to me that we would invent, or develop it, because the concept itself is functional to the maintenance of any society. I'm pretty sure every religion has some version of the ten commandments; "thou shalt not steal" or "thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife", etc., are pretty good basic rules to ensure that people can live together in society.
Party_of_One

It seems to me that "God" did not create "man", but rather that "man" created "God"…for better or for worse. What we conceive of as "God" is a product of human invention and is limited only by the capacity of our mental and emotional processes, which may or may not be evolving.

Which is why I've always liked Tom Waits' line, "Don't you know there ain't no Devil, there's just God when he's drunk!", as it highlights the very human origins of "God".
Party_of_One

And yes, I recognize that terrible things have been done in the name of "God"…by human beings. But good things have been done as well. In both cases, though, "God" has been inert, that is, not an active participant in what has been done in his/her/its name.

The invocation of "God" and "God's will" as a justification for human action has always struck me as a blatantly transparent grab for power, power that is held to be beyond questioning, unlike any other forms of power. To me, this fundamentally attacks the very basic human capacity of reason and of being able to question "Why". Again, it doesn't really matter if the invocation of "God" is in the service of good OR evil actions, it is nontheless an attempt to "trump" human beings collective responsibility to justify their own actions.
A_logician

Not an original concept, but one worth introducing to the discussion.

Voltaire: "If god didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him."

John Lennon: "Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today…

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace…"
wascally wabbit

…Therefore, be at peace with God, whatever you conceive him to be…
And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should!
TheNationalist7

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world but that the world through Him might be saved. St. John 3:16, 17
Party_of_One

For God (who?)so loved the world (how?) He gave His only begotten Son (evidence of parentage? evidence of "only"?) that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life (how's that been delivered on?)For God did not send His Son into the world (did "God" send anyone, anywhere?) to condemn the world (proof?…and what if he did?) but that the world through Him might be saved. (errr…from what…salesmen?)

Pretty good pitch(EVERLASTING LIFE! CALL AND ORDER NOW, WE'LL GIVE YOU TWO!), but really only believable if one suspends disbelief. It doesn't seem all that productive to quote Scripture (written and edited by who, and with what agenda?) to people unless you're pretty sure that they share the faith you have in the existance of YOUR god in the first place, because it will fall on deaf ears. And if they do share your faith, you're preaching to the choir loft. What's the point?
Party_of_One

I appreciate how many people in hopeless situations may be attracted to this creed, especially in "early historical" times, but it provides no "comfort" or "explanation" to me. You're welcome to it, enjoy it, whatever gets you through the night, I'll never deny anyone the right to believe what they choose. Just please extend that same courtesy to those who choose NOT to believe what you believe in. (I think that's a version of "The golden rule", isn't it?)
TheNationalist7

Mr. Feschuk opened the door for discussion concerning God and so what better way to address the issue than to quote John 3: 16 & 17. God is love and God is just, both attributes are dealt with in these scriptures.
TheNationalist7

Mr. Feschuk opened the door for discussion concerning God and so what better way to address the issue than to quote John 3: 16 & 17? JHVH God is love and JHVH God is just, both attributes are dealt with in these scriptures, aren't they. Since you appear to believe that you are god I suggest that you write your own scriptures.