God Laughs

Part Two – The Ten Commandments

When asked if he believed Moses receiving the Ten Commandments was a revelation, Thomas Paine replied, “Yes, but only to Moses. To everyone else it is hearsay.” Much of what should be considered hearsay is all too often taken as gospel by Christians because of what they interpret from the Bible, and other religions look to proverbs and passages from their holy texts with the same results. Unfortunately, that which is considered to be gospel is seldom questioned or challenged as surely it should be. The content of those Ten Commandments should raise serious questions, not simply whether they ought to be displayed publicly on federal property, but whether they should be accepted as rules from God, and further, whether or not they are good rules to live by.

At the outset let’s acknowledge that Moses was a wise, capable and well-qualified leader, one who recognized what was needed to maintain order and one who was aware of his own limitations. As he may well have seen it, laws and rules derived by Moses may carry some weight with the children of Israel, but Commandments from God would definitely carry a whole lot more weight. Commandments from God, rather than from Moses, would give much needed credence to the rules, but more importantly from Moses’ point of view, they would solidify his role as leader. One may or may not choose to obey the word of Moses, but one will surely strive to obey the word of God. And who would one choose to follow, a common leader or one who communicates directly with God? Moses recognized those nuances; why else go up into the mountains alone?

The idea that God has communicated directly with a few, a extremely scarce few, chosen men, and that mankind must heed and obey that which is passed along by those chosen few, has evolved beyond religious mythology. Man possesses the capacity to think and reason, yet many believe that God wants them to suppress their reasoning ability and accept without question that which is hearsay. God must laugh at such a concept. Sheep and lemmings were created to be sheep and lemmings. Man was not!

But back to the Ten Commandments. Civilized man realizes the need for laws and beyond that he knows that laws often require complex explanations and definitions for reasons of clarity in order to avoid loopholes, exceptions and confusion. Consequently, we do not have such simple laws as: ‘Thou shalt not kill’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal.’ These simple thou shalt nots, left to interpretation of convenience, have plagued man with moral dilemmas for centuries. ‘Thou shalt not kill’ means one thing, while ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’ means something else and ‘turn thy cheek’ something completely different and contradictory. So we conveniently find exceptions to ‘Thou shalt not kill’ in order to accommodate our justification of war, self-defense, and the death penalty. Then there are the myriad issues concerning taking a life that is not human life. Is hunting okay? Can we kill those pesky insects?

The real issue concerning those Ten Commandments, however, goes beyond critiquing their vulnerability to interpretation. The real issue is their value as rules to live by, to improve human civility and man’s ability to coexist with his fellow man in harmony with the natural environment. Remember, this is THE Ten Commandments, God’s directives, what He demands of man. A Supreme Being would never include triviality and nonsense in such a list.

Triviality? Is it not blasphemous to claim the Ten Commandments to be trivial? ‘Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.’ In the overall scheme of things, that is trivial. ‘Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.’ This from the Supreme Being? He does not need your worship nor does He need your undivided attention. He put you here with other objectives in mind. Besides, and do give this serious consideration, since He knows what is in your heart and on your mind, does that not make overt worship a wasted effort. Is it not redundant?

If the above assertion of triviality is blasphemous, it is but a venial blasphemy when compared with what must be the deadly sin of claiming some Commandments to be nonsense. Nonetheless, commanding one to not covet is commanding one to not wish, want, or desire and that simply goes against human nature. To not covet is tantamount to not living, or even worse, living after a lobotomy. The sin is not in coveting. Coveting is natural. The sin is what one does as a result of, or in response to, his coveting, and the commandment should so specify. Perhaps the commandment should read: Though Thou may be beset by extremely strong wants, desires and urges that cannot and often should not be fulfilled, it is incumbent upon thee to learn to live with and accept those disappointments.

But the very worst of the Commandments, one that truly does more harm than good, and one that was obviously derived from man and not from God is: ‘Honor thy father and thy mother.’ God would never put the onus on the child! This crutch for poor parenting must be recognized and acknowledged for what it is. Becoming a parent is all too simple and natural. Being a parent, a good parent, is far more difficult. Children come into the world wanting nothing more than to honor, love and respect their parents. It is the parents who must be commanded to always strive to earn the honor and respect of their children. Using the fear of God’s wrath to control and manipulate a child is detrimental to both child and parent.

God cannot be happy with our interpretation and blind acceptance of the Ten Commandments. But then, as thinking, reasoning and supposedly rational beings, we do manage to disappoint in oh so many ways.

GOD LAUGHS

Part I – Man and Sex

The concept of God, The Supreme Being, The Creator, from a religious perspective is quite different from that which one could ever perceive if left solely to one’s personal experiences and observations, especially if those experiences and observations pertain to sex. Human sexuality, if nothing else, provides overwhelming evidence that God has a sense of humor. But where to begin?

Heterosexuality, homosexuality, bi-sexuality, A-sexuality, transvestites, fetishes, rape, prostitution, pornography, paedophilia, nymphomania, frigidity, incest, masturbation, sexual dysfunction, libidos, hormones all are parts of human sexuality and all, to one degree or another, impact human behavior. To encumber man with such a powerful, complex and frustrating psychological modifier as the sex drive, with all of its obvious consequences, surely requires a sense of humor. And after inflicting man and woman with this overpowering source of pleasure, pain and frustration, should not God, at the very least, have addressed the issue in more than just a few of His Ten Commandments? Does it make sense that an all-knowing God, aware of man’s penchant toward extreme behavior, would limit His concerns and admonitions regarding sexual excesses to adultery and coveting? Only, it would seem, if He possessed a cynical sense of humor. That being the case, one can only conclude that God laughs. What else can He do?

Think Tiger Woods and his recent fall from grace, Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, Gary Hart and Donna Rice, or go back to the Profumo Affair that rocked the U.K. in the early 60’s, or Jimmy Swaggert and other evangelicals who could not or would not control their libidos. Can you really think about these kinds of events and not imagine God chuckling? Even that which is not funny can have humorous aspects. Suicide bombings certainly are not funny, but the concept of carrying out such an extreme act of violence for Allah’s promise of forty virgins in paradise; that is laughable, an example of the thin line that can exist between pathos and humor. And what of those other men of God, the priests whose sexual transgressions have shaken the very foundation of the Catholic Church? It is not their homosexual predations that evoke humor. It is the concept of mandatory, institutionalized celibacy that is funny. God provides a domineering sex drive, then demands that you suppress and overcome that drive in order to “serve” Him.

The inability to control one’s sex drive is not rare. Nor is it limited to identifiable segments of the population. The fact is, we know not what transpires behind another’s closed doors, even another whom we consider to be quite close to us. One man’s normal sexual activity is another’s guilt-ridden fantasy, and another may consider it to be deviant, taboo or even sinful behavior.

Sexual compatibility, though probably not rare, is certainly not the norm. The term sexual compatibility here pertains to couples supposedly “in love” and committed to one another’s happiness. The processes couples go through to determine if in fact they are compatible are fraught with humor, especially from the standpoint of a neutral third party. Couples must “work” at sex; there are no universally enjoyable or accepted sexual practices and, even if there were, people would still raise issue concerning time, size, mood, distractions, deviations…

Just as we laugh at the inept actions and frustrations of others, surely a Supreme Being would laugh at man’s sexual fumbling, his excesses and abuses. People pray that He, “Lead us not into temptation”, then conduct themselves as though tempting others and being tempted were life’s main objectives. The media, specifically entertainment and advertising, fashion, books and now even medicine are dominated by sex. Today’s standards tolerate far more than yesterday’s, and tomorrow's will make today look tame. Religion cannot control it. Society does not control it. And when either of these entities tries to control it, their efforts prove more detrimental than helpful.

Man is quick to determine God’s will in this regard. That is, most believe that what is abhorrent to them is abhorrent to God, and should therefore be forbidden. Well, if all of this does not make Him laugh, then He must be shaking His head and reminding Himself to do it a little differently next time.