God? I know na-tink of zis God. Iz my hand on fire?
When it came out on my trip to Detroit with the coven that I was indeed an atheist they attacked me with the vigor of a zealot. Then I busted this on them... It wasn't quite as eloquent as this but here goes.
God made man in His image---at least that’s what you fundamentalist variety of Christian is quick to say. Not long ago, I would have vehemently disagreed, joyfully pouncing on this notion because as God is all things he must be female too. Recently, however, I have found that more fun may be had by nodding in agreement and then following your Christian arguments through to their logical conclusions. To see what I mean, lets take the objectionable statement and line its premises up in a row.
First we have the would-be point of contention: God is male. This alone wouldn’t get us very far, but the few Christians who insist on God’s maleness would then go on to deny the two other premises we need for our merrymaking. These other two premises are that: God is perfect, and God is unique. Once these three things are granted, everything that follows falls out as part of a simple deduction:
The Argument:
Firstly, drawing upon common knowledge of our first premise we know that to be male one must have a penis. Therefore God, being male, must have a penis of appropriately holy proportions. (It would do no good to claim that to be male is to have a Y-chromosome in this case, because God, of course, is supposed to be a spiritual, not a biological being.)
Because efficiency and precision are virtues, we know from our second premise that a perfect being would suffer no waste. God then would have no wasteful organs. Putting the two ideas together, it can therefore be said that, since God has a penis, He must use his penis for something. But use it for what? The penis only serves two functions, and, since a perfect being would no more produce waste than have wasted organs, the possible uses of God’s penis are reduced to those of a sexual nature.
An astute reader might now notice that this argument has taken a rather puzzling turn. Worse than puzzling actually----for if, as according to our third premise, God is unique, then there are no others like Him. And if there are no others like Him, well then sexual reproduction is right out of the question.
A conundrum indeed, but this needn’t lead us to abandon the notion of God’s manhood as if the universe’s most loving and benevolent deity were the victim of some sort of botched circumcision. No. Though it first appears that the argument ends here in contradiction, we are in fact not stranded with an irresolvable paradox. With a little thought and a touch of cerebral resourcefulness another use for God’s penis stands up to be seen. There is another option. To the relief of Christians everywhere, God’s manhood can be saved!
You mean?
That’s right. God masturbates!
Problem solved. The solution is a straight forward deduction, and it can be held with a conviction equal to that of the premises that drive it. Put into standard form, the argument looks like this:
God is male.
All males have a penis.
.------------------------
. .Therefore God has a penis.
God is perfect.
[A perfect being has no useless attributes.]
God has a penis.
.------------------------
. .Therefore God must use his penis.
God is a unique being.
[A unique being has no others like himself.]
A penis is used for either waste removal or sexual activity.
God uses his penis
[But not for waste or reproduction.]
.-------------------------
. . Therefore God must masturbate.
After seeing its ramifications, the notion of God’s maleness is a far reaching one for Christianity; and it is, in fact, an even more dramatic discovery than it at first appears. This is because Christians don’t merely assert that God is sometimes perfect or sometimes unique. No, they assert He is always perfect and always unique. This allows us to justify this additional deduction:
God must masturbate if He is perfect, male, and unique.
God is always perfect, male, and unique.
.-----------------------------------------------
. . God is always masturbating.
So there it is. Not only is this the outline for some pretty impressive apologetics, but the solution resolves an older, more serious, theological problem as well: Philosophers and skeptics have often asked, “How is it that an all-powerful, benevolent, being can suffer the presence of so much evil in the world?” Now we know. With all of God’s cosmic self-pleasuring, He can hardly be expected to participate in the mundane, earthly, affairs of everyday life.
God or no God, it looks as if we human beings are on our own.
God made man in His image---at least that’s what you fundamentalist variety of Christian is quick to say. Not long ago, I would have vehemently disagreed, joyfully pouncing on this notion because as God is all things he must be female too. Recently, however, I have found that more fun may be had by nodding in agreement and then following your Christian arguments through to their logical conclusions. To see what I mean, lets take the objectionable statement and line its premises up in a row.
First we have the would-be point of contention: God is male. This alone wouldn’t get us very far, but the few Christians who insist on God’s maleness would then go on to deny the two other premises we need for our merrymaking. These other two premises are that: God is perfect, and God is unique. Once these three things are granted, everything that follows falls out as part of a simple deduction:
The Argument:
Firstly, drawing upon common knowledge of our first premise we know that to be male one must have a penis. Therefore God, being male, must have a penis of appropriately holy proportions. (It would do no good to claim that to be male is to have a Y-chromosome in this case, because God, of course, is supposed to be a spiritual, not a biological being.)
Because efficiency and precision are virtues, we know from our second premise that a perfect being would suffer no waste. God then would have no wasteful organs. Putting the two ideas together, it can therefore be said that, since God has a penis, He must use his penis for something. But use it for what? The penis only serves two functions, and, since a perfect being would no more produce waste than have wasted organs, the possible uses of God’s penis are reduced to those of a sexual nature.
An astute reader might now notice that this argument has taken a rather puzzling turn. Worse than puzzling actually----for if, as according to our third premise, God is unique, then there are no others like Him. And if there are no others like Him, well then sexual reproduction is right out of the question.
A conundrum indeed, but this needn’t lead us to abandon the notion of God’s manhood as if the universe’s most loving and benevolent deity were the victim of some sort of botched circumcision. No. Though it first appears that the argument ends here in contradiction, we are in fact not stranded with an irresolvable paradox. With a little thought and a touch of cerebral resourcefulness another use for God’s penis stands up to be seen. There is another option. To the relief of Christians everywhere, God’s manhood can be saved!
You mean?
That’s right. God masturbates!
Problem solved. The solution is a straight forward deduction, and it can be held with a conviction equal to that of the premises that drive it. Put into standard form, the argument looks like this:
God is male.
All males have a penis.
.------------------------
. .Therefore God has a penis.
God is perfect.
[A perfect being has no useless attributes.]
God has a penis.
.------------------------
. .Therefore God must use his penis.
God is a unique being.
[A unique being has no others like himself.]
A penis is used for either waste removal or sexual activity.
God uses his penis
[But not for waste or reproduction.]
.-------------------------
. . Therefore God must masturbate.
After seeing its ramifications, the notion of God’s maleness is a far reaching one for Christianity; and it is, in fact, an even more dramatic discovery than it at first appears. This is because Christians don’t merely assert that God is sometimes perfect or sometimes unique. No, they assert He is always perfect and always unique. This allows us to justify this additional deduction:
God must masturbate if He is perfect, male, and unique.
God is always perfect, male, and unique.
.-----------------------------------------------
. . God is always masturbating.
So there it is. Not only is this the outline for some pretty impressive apologetics, but the solution resolves an older, more serious, theological problem as well: Philosophers and skeptics have often asked, “How is it that an all-powerful, benevolent, being can suffer the presence of so much evil in the world?” Now we know. With all of God’s cosmic self-pleasuring, He can hardly be expected to participate in the mundane, earthly, affairs of everyday life.
God or no God, it looks as if we human beings are on our own.