Yahweh Deserves Better than Texas Primitive Gohmert
Everybody loves a good story and, as Aristotle taught, nothing drives impact like a beginning, middle and end. Start off with fetching characters and compelling themes, a plotline awash with suspense, then cap it off with a wow ending. Genesis oozes mythic ingredients as pre-science scribes, with nary a clue about impenetrable mysteries, fashioned a poetic rendition in part to discourage nitpicking. The stage set, we shift to high drama of the Fall, then the dysfunctional, disaster-prone first family that marches into the real world of earthly time. The loss of Paradise -- by which godlike figures trade Eden for death -- is no less than humanity's greatest tragedy, indelibly stamped with permanent, if metaphoric original sin. No factual history inhibits this myth.
Then along comes Louis Gohmert, the mocking dunderhead who represents Texas in Congress. This clownish fundamentalist, thrilled to play to the cheap seats, not only mangles this most unliteral, mythic core, he snubs modern science -- and the overwhelming consensus there is no single, identifiable beginning, nor does existence come "from nothing." Thus, the notion of "God the Creator" (with his own widely- fluctuating culture over time) is simply one shortcut that explains the conundrum of how and when did we get where we are.
And if you're a Gohmert, you box yourself in your own dead end while displaying most unChristian intolerance. This is what passes for Gohmert theology at a three-week (!) fundamentalist prayer rally, "no matter how smart they think they are, an atheist has to admit that he believes the equation: nobody plus nothing equals everything." Au contraire: the atheist simply refutes unbelievable (Judaic-Christian) myth-making, and hardly "has to admit" that so-called God is God because he allegedly creates everything out of nothing -- and miraculously in only a week.
"Nothingness" is a figment of Gohmert blarney since modern science establishes that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed, thus both always existed, needing no "creation" in our time or space (whatever these terms end up meaning). This God creator is then at best a cook, not a fabricator ex nihilo. That we mere humanity, spinning on a speck in an unimaginably vast cosmos, cannot "explain" how stuff came about doesn't demand an all-powerful, all-omniscience father figure substitute. Thus reason refutes Gohmert.
Locking in the Lesser Literalism