Online Journal
Front Page 
 
 Donate
 
 Submissions
 
 Announcements
 
 NewsLinks
 
 Special Reports
 
 News Media
 
 Elections & Voting
 
 Health
 
 Religion
 
 Social Security
 
 Analysis
 
 Commentary
 
 Editors' Blog
 
 Reclaiming America
 
 The Splendid Failure of Occupation
 
 The Lighter Side
 
 Reviews
 
 The Mailbag
 
 Online Journal Stores
 Official Merchandise
 Amazon.com
 
 Links
 
 Join Mailing List
Search

Religion Last Updated: Jun 10th, 2009 - 00:59:25


Do you believe in God? Yes or no?
By Jorge Majfud
Online Journal Contributing Writer


Jun 10, 2009, 00:12

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

Someone asks me whether I believe in God and indicates that a one sentence answer will do. Two at the most. It�s easy: yes or no.

I�m sorry, but why do you insist on subjecting me to the tyranny of such a question? If you are truly interested in my response, you will have to hear me out. If not, good day to you. Nothing is lost.

The question, like so many others, is tricky. It demands of me a clear yes or a clear no. I would have one of those very clear answers if the god about which I am being asked were so clear and well-defined. Do you like Santiago? Excuse me, which Santiago? Santiago de Compostela in Spain or Santiago, Chile? Santiago del Estero in Argentina or Santiago Matamoros?

Okay, look, my greatest desire is for God to exist. It�s the only thing I ask of him. But not just any god. It seems like almost everyone agrees that there is only one God, but if that is true then one must recognize that this is a god with multiple personalities, from multiple religions and with mutual hatred for one another.

The truth is that I cannot believe in a god who inflames the heart for war and who inspires such fear that nobody is capable of making even the slightest change. Which is why dying and killing for that lie is common practice, questioning it a rare heresy. I cannot believe, and much less support, a god who orders people massacred, who is made to the measure and convenience of some nations above others, of some social classes above others, of some genders above others, of some races above others. A god who for his own entertainment has created some men to be condemned from birth and others to be the select few until death, and a god who, at the same time, is praised for his universality and infinite love.

How does one believe in such a selfish, such a mean-spirited god? A criminal god who condemns greed and the accumulation of money and rewards the chosen greedy ones with greater material wealth. How does one believe in a god of neckties on Sunday, who shouts and swells with blood condemning those who don�t believe in such an apparatus of war and domination? How does one believe in a god who instead of liberating subjugates, punishes, and condemns? How does one believe in a small-minded god who needs the minor politics of a few of the faithful in order to gain votes? How does one believe in a mediocre god who must use bureaucracy on Earth to administer his business in Heaven? How does one believe in a god who allows himself to be manipulated like a child frightened in the night and who every day serves the most repugnant interests on Earth? How does one believe in a god who draws mysterious images on dank walls in order to announce to humanity that we are living in a time of hatreds and wars? How does one believe in a god who communicates through street-corner charlatans who promise Heaven and threaten Hell to passersby, as if they were real estate agents?

Which god are we talking about when we talk about the One and All Powerful God? Is this the same God who sends fanatics to immolate themselves in a market, the same God who sends planes to discharge Hell on children and innocents in his name? Perhaps so. Then, I don�t believe in that god. Rather, I don�t want to believe that such a criminal could be a supernatural force. Because we already have our hands full with our own human wickedness. It�s just that human evil would not be so hypocritical if it were to focus on oppressing and killing in its own name and not in the name of a kind and creative god.

A God who allows his manipulators -- who have no peace in their hearts -- to speak of the infinite peace of God while they go around condemning those without faith. Condemning those who have no faith in that tragic madness attributed every day to God. Men and women without peace who claim to be chosen by God and who go around proclaiming this because it�s not enough for them that God would have chosen them for their doubtful virtues. Those terrorists of the soul who go about threatening with Hell -- sometimes softly and sometimes shouting -- anybody who dares to doubt so much madness.

A God, creator of the Universe, who must fit between the narrow walls of consecrated homes and buildings uncursed by man, not so that God has a place but so that God can be put in a place. In a proper place, which is to say, privatized, controlled, circumscribed to a few ideas, a few paragraphs, and at the service of a sect of the self-chosen.

Of course, the classic accusation, established by tradition, for all those who would doubt the real attributes of God is arrogance. The furious preachers, in contrast, do not stop for an instant to reflect upon the infinite arrogance of their claim to belong to, and even guide and administer, the select club of those chosen by the Creator.

The only thing I ask of God is that he exist. But every time I see these celestial hordes I am reminded of the story, true or fictitious, of the indigenous chieftain Hatuey, condemned to be burned alive by the governor of Cuba, Diego Vel�squez. According to Father Bartolom� de las Casas, a priest was present for Hatuey�s final hours, offering him Heaven if he converted to Christianity. The chieftain asked if white men could be found there. �Yes,� responded the priest, �because they believe in God.� Which was sufficient reason for the rebel chief to refuse to accept the new truth.

Then, if God is that being who walks behind his followers in a trance, in all truthfulness, I cannot believe in him. Why would the Creator confer critical reason on his creatures and then demand of them blind obedience, hallucinatory trembling, uncontrollable hatreds? Why would God prefer believers to thinkers? Why would enlightenment mean the loss of consciousness? Could it be that innocence and obedience get along well?

And does all this mean that God does not exist? No. Who am I to give such a response? I was just wondering if the creator of the Universe really fits in a nutshell, in the head of a missile.

Jorge Majfud is a Uruguayan writer. He currently teaches at Lincoln University in Pennsylvania. He has traveled to more than 40 countries, whose impressions have become part of his novels and essays. His publications include Hacia qu� patrias del silencio (memorias de un desaparecido) [novel] (Montevideo, Uruguay: Editorial Graffiti, 1996; Tenerife, Spain: Baile del Sol, 2001); Cr�tica de la pasi�n pura [essays] (Montevideo: Editorial Graffiti, 1998; Fairfax, Virginia: HCR, 1999; Buenos Aires, Argentina: Editorial Argenta, 2000); and La reina de Am�rica [novel] (Tenerife: Baile del Sol, 2002).

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor

Top of Page

Religion
Latest Headlines
No pagan trees for Christmas warriors
Zionism�s un-Christian Bible
A matter of faith?
God has left the building
The Catholic Church plays victim, again
Christian nationalism: The darkest side of religion
Institutional Islamophobia and the politics of a minor�s choice
Not a good month for the Christian Right
Propagating fairy tales for power and profit
Do you believe in God? Yes or no?
Religious fundamentalism is a crime against humanity
The �Christian� Right�s still wrong and singing the same old song: Part 2
The �Christian� Right�s still wrong and singing the same old song: Part 1
I�m not against religion; I�m against religious hypocrisy
More from the religious right
And they didn�t disappoint
The Religious Right�s continuing anti-human campaigns -- Part 2
The Religious Right�s continuing anti-human campaigns -- Part 1
The same old Religious Right, with a few new tricks: Part 2
The same old Religious Right, with a few new tricks: Part 1