New Ways of Seeing

Back in the day I had every explanation there was to show how god did it. I could mend and coerce any thought into a bible verse and show the connection to gods love. I’m quite puxxled and alarmed by the process now, but what religioso today is interested in research when it counters his presupposed, indoctrinated upbringing—opening that mind to legitimate answers doesn’t really go hand in hand. The answers come through unbelief, not the other way around.

Abraham had it easy. He was tested to see if he would kill his only son in a time of brutality. A violent sociality that was already laden with superstition. He heard voices, and followed the (accepted by the day) promptings, and at the last second had woken from his trancelike state and withheld his hand. So what? In a time where little was understood about disease or science, the gods accounted for everything from illness, rain, floods, lightening, and drought and movements in the earth. Gods were interwoven into the psyche and dreams of everyone for every thing. His perceived command to kill his son was difficult, but acceptable to him as a means to appease a god. We know enough now to get help, or offer it when things like this manifest.

I would say emphatically, no! Get someone else to do your evil, but mental illness has no limits when left untreated. Can one truly be tested, not knowing it’s just a test? Of course. That’s what makes Abraham all the more worrisome. The father of many nations, revered by all abrahamic faiths, was willing to kill his son by a hallucinatorial perceived command. How is this heroic?

Ah…it’s a type and shadow of the Christ. A metaphor of the sacrifice to come— shinbexamoke alutarristaskas—which is tongues for spectral evidence, spiked with ergot poisoning, famine, draught, superstition and temporal lobe seizures. Noitanicullah is tongues for hallucination spelled backwards, but no matter how you spell slice it (foreskin and all) today Abraham would’ve been committed, not celebrated.

“To continuously evaluate whether a being is good requires moral judgment, which requires moral autonomy
8. Therefore it is not possible to continuously evaluate if a being is good while also worshipping it
9. Therefore, worshipping necessarily requires abandoning one’s moral responsibility, which is immoral
10. Therefore, no being is worthy of worship”—James Rachel “God and Moral Autonomy”
—Quote mining officially through the offices of TheCommonAtheist™️ and its subscribers, with special thanks to JZ (2018)