Touching The Untouchables #4: "Loving God" - The X'mas Special (Comin' Out Of The Closet)

For all you fans of the beloved segment, "Touching The Untouchables" is finally back after a long period out in the wilderness. And just in time for X'mas too!

After the runaway success (at least in stirring up a hornets' nest) of "Touching The Untouchables #1: Jefferson and His Slaves", "#2: Charlemagne" and "#3: Abraham", it really was a no-brainer that the series had to make a comeback at some point. And, therefore, it was never really an issue of if, but simply of when. And so, at last, that when is now.

The success of the earlier installments got me thinking "Hey, why not aim even higher this time? All the way to the top." No, not The Bob, I'm talking even higher, I'm talking about touching the number one untouchable of all. You know, the big guy him (definitely him!) self. I'm talking about "Loving God" from that #1 Bestseller of all time (no, not "The Da Vinci Code", though I believe he's in that one too).

I'm not here to comment on the intentional mass murder of almost every human being on the planet in that Great Flood event, including the millions of babies and little children who, it would seem, were deemed deserving of death due to their parents' supposedly sinful ways; nor am I here to talk about the wrathful turning into salt pillars of those who disobeyed an order; nor the killing of all those Egyptian baby boys; nor the ordering of the Israelis to slaughter all of the people of Canaan.

And I'm not even here to comment on the sadistic lifelong torture of Job simply to make some ridiculous point about keeping one's faith no matter how horrible your existence may become.

No, all that crap, inflicted by the so-called "Loving God", has been commented on by quite a few people over the ages (often at the cost of their lives, mind you; lives taken not by "Loving God", of course, but by his most righteous followers). And let's leave for the moment the fact that calling such an angry, vengeful, jealous, wrathful, pissed-off, bloodthirsty god a "Loving God" is slightly ridiculous and more than a bit laughable. No, I think that's pretty obvious to everyone, really; even if few would dare raise the topic and no matter how hard many might try to rationalize away the facts (at least as they are written).

Much like with the co-dependent family members of a drug addict or the followers of some clearly insane guru, reality, it seems, must not be allowed to intrude on one's fantasized perception of the situation. But, like I said, that's not really what I'm here to comment on today.

What I am here to ask is this: What's with the whole "only begotten son" thing? I mean, Mother Of God man, if you're an All-Powerful God who can flood the world on a whim, set bushes on fire, get hoards of people to run around with only one sandal (oops, wrong movie) ... and somehow take Barry Manilow all the way back to the top of the charts, then surely you can make more than one son, right?! You could probably even have triplets if you wanted. Perhaps you could even have a daughter.

But I guess I'll never really understand this whole faith thing, will I? Just call me clueless. I mean, some people (close to a billion actually) think that if you rub Ganesh's trunk then you'll become more prosperous. Others believe that if you kneel down 5 times a dddddddddddddddddd, no I'm not going to go there, um, ah... I mean if you flock to the pancake house where someone said they saw the image of the Virgin Mary in their maple syrup, then your sick relative will miraculously recover. But being quite committed to the whole idea of rational thought, which faith has absolutely nothing to do with, I don't think I'll ever really get this whole faith thing. And I mean that in both senses of the term.

And by the way, what's with some people wanting this "Loving God" to be represented as female anyway? I mean, I'd say a Great Creator, if one existed, would have to be female, but who would want to represent this particular petty, angry, jealous, wrathful, etc. "Loving God" guy as female? That's only equality in pettiness, if you ask me. And who needs that? And, besides, a female God wouldn't have come out in support of a book that says you can sell your daughters into slavery, now would she have? Nor would she have ordered someone to kill his son as a "test of loyalty" (what is this, The Sopranos?). Plus you can't have a female god impregnating that virgin Mary woman now can you? That'd clearly raise the whole gay marriage debate and you simply don't want to go there, at least not over X'mas.

And, yeah, I know the Rationalizers and Explainers can always find some wonderful message and moral in everything and anything, but there's really no "moral" or "story" in many of these tales, at least not one I'd want inflicted on any kids - or anyone - I know. Come on, it's time to simply admit it, there's just no way around the fact that the Loving God-ordered mass genocide of the people of Canaan is nothing but a genocide, straight and simple - rationalize and explain away all you like. And the story of pissed-off-at-the-parents-therefore-must-kill-all-the- children-on-the-planet "Loving God the Flooder" is really nothing more than the story of an angry pissed off mass murderer. I mean, really, the guy sounds like a disgruntled postal worker. Or worse, that guy with the little moustache. And I don't mean Chaplin.

Seriously, The Rationalizers and Explainers would try to explain away the Holocaust if it appeared in their "Good Book" as "Loving God's" will. And, really, that's exactly what's already going on with the "explanations" and rationalizations offered up about the whole divinely and immaculately planned genocide of the people of Canaan. But, I gotta tell ya, it sure sounds pretty straightforward to me: "You must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy." Yeah, and gouge their eyeballs out while you're at it! Kill 'em real good!

Now if Loving God and all his Rationalizers and Explainers would just call a psychotically vengeful, wrathful and genocidal deity "A Psychotically Vengeful, Wrathful and Genocidal Deity" then that would be a lot more honest. Or they could at the very least go with a slightly more accurate title like, say, "Petty and Vengeful God" or "Wrathful and Totally Pissed God" or "Irritated and Not Particularly All That Friendly God". I mean, all these centuries later isn't it time to stop living behind false labels? Isn't it time to stop living a lie. Isn't it time that "Loving God" finally came out of the closet and admitted just who he is, with the full support of his family of Manipulators - sorry, I mean, Rationalizers and Explainers - of course. He needn't worry too much about losing support, at least not from his most hardcore supporters, because that's the part of "Loving God" that the fundamentalist have always loved best anyways. And, truth be told, they were always a bit uncomfortable with that whole hippyish, weak-on-the-War-On-Sin-sounding title of "Loving God" to start with.

So, it's decided then. "Loving God" comes out of the closet, throws off all false pretenses, picks a more honest and macho name and takes all of his hardcore followers away someplace to rejoice and slaughter something. Hopefully then all the other less rabid, more peaceful and loving followers can simply just move on.

And that's my X'mas wish for the world.

Mike Cowie (Oredakedo)
Wednesday, December 20th, 2006