lastobelus
replying on Where was god? by little_big_nose
3 Jan 2004, 9:51 AM
I don't think we need have any question about the duncitude of our bittle_nig_lose. But you sir, with your last sentence have at least temporarily earned yourself a genuine pair of brandname Pomeranker Trousers.
It may be that the author is a quadro-dunce. Indeed, their post on your poeme would suggest just that. I thought the author was trying to get Christians to ask themselves those questions, viz. "will God ever be there?" etc, so that they might come to the conclusion that their God doesn't exist or something. I think the only way to resolve this dispute is to ask the author whether or not they are angry with a non-existent God. It's a standpoint I can quite understand; I myself am extremely angry with the non-existent hammer that is currently bludgeoning my non-existent pet otter to an imaginary bloody pulp.
I'm trying to parse the first stanza and I would like to know if I got it right. I'll add in the conjunctive phrases I am using to provide an interpretation in square brackets:
[while]Eating my soul[,]
Your touch is so cold
[that] I thought you meant [to eat] everything
[but instead] You [have] made it into a whole lot of NOTHING [making the exercise of having my soul eaten seem somewhat pointless since it no longer exists]
Ok, I know that last bit is a little more than a conjunctive phrase, but did I get it more or less right?
Thanks.
How can you be an atheist when the Bible says atheists go to Hell? Checkmate, I believe.
I am deeply aware of and well-versed in both sides of the "contradiction between the existence of a benevolent, all-powerful Jesu and the existence of suffering," also known as the Argument from Evil. My entire family are fundamentalist pentecostals, many of them preachers, as well as most of my extended family. I know my bible & I know my atheism, since my atheism didn't come lightly but was purchased at great emotional & social cost. I disagree entirely that this poem is discussing the Argument from Evil in a meaningful way. I question whether the author has thought it through that far.
"Will god ever be there
When I really need someone to care?
Or will god just run
Just like he has always done?"
These are the words of someone angry at a god they want to exist for not answering there pleas, not the words of someone discussing the Argument from Evil for atheism.
Do I get my trousers back now?
I wasn't in a huff, I was being droll. Ok, attempting to be droll.
So here's a clear answer: I am atheist. And I think this poem is eye-rollingly stupid, because it is essentially saying "god sucks because he doesn't exist." My post was baiting him because that's an annoying habit I have, baiting people I think are being stupid. Result: he went and crapped on one of my pomes in a way that amused me. So, it was a profitable baiting.
Alles klar?
Of course it's stupid to say something sucks because it doesn't exist. But I don't think that's what anyone here is trying to say. This poeme is essentially just the argument concerning the supposed contradiction between the existence of a benevolent, all-powerful Jesu and the existence of suffering. The author is saying that if God existed, he would suck (or at least could not be benevolent AND all powerful), so a benevolent, all-powerful God does not exist. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this argument, but I definitely think you have misinterpreted the poeme if you think it means "God sucks because He doesn't exist". If you think that, then I'm afraid it is you who is the one who is wearing no trousers, not me.
Why not just answer the question? And for your information, your intentions cannot be "quickly resolved" by perusing your posting history. I spent some time doing just that before posting my comment and couldn't decide whether you were joking or not. If I had to bet my life on it, I'd probably say you weren't joking since, after asking you about it, you seem to have got yourself into some sort of "huff". Nice one!
Oh YES baby. This coffee, it VIBRATES? Seriously I don't care how many rules this poem breaks I love it. It is robust, exuberant, with an innocent aftertaste of blossoms, full of body. And full of metaphorical body, or at least i read it that way, but I'm just an old lech. I COULD NOT STOP thinking "blowjob" the whole way through. I WANT TO BE COFFEE!!!! Can I be coffee, can I please please? KEEP going snowflake, I think you are the next Princess Bukowski.
This is absolutely briliant. Though I suspect the use of "the" in line two was incidentall, and intended only to achieve sylable count, the result is nevertheles startlingly evocative.
I think it's permissible to mock people for expressing either love OR hatred of g/God. But I think it's NECESSARY to mock people for saying g/God sucks because he doesn't exist. That's just stupid.
Questions of whether a particular post by a particular poster is intended to be taken at face value or as satire, sarcasm, irony, or double entendre can generally be quickly resolved by perusing said poster's posting history. If you're unable to find enough clues in the text itself to resolve your uncertainty, this may be a necessary step for you.
"After some treatments
you'll look like a sith."
Is that a Star Wars reference? lol Sounds a lot like it... Nice poem.
a ten in the hopes we may be blessed with his holy presence.
People who disagree with God can roam this website and express there hatred towards Him, while the people who actually agree agree with God aren't and get mocked at when WE express our love towards Him (and Jesus)? ...That just isn't fair, is it?
Here here! And where is he these days? And his pops.
Every time I read something by SupremeDreamer.
No problem, richa. By the way, if you would like to read a thorough exploration of my views relating to elderlys, why not have a look at my comment (in reply to Joe-joe) on the following poeme:
http://www.poemranker.com/poem-details.j