Louie Gohmert Mocks Getting a Universe Out of Nothing But Then Creates His God Out of Nothing

The Statue of Liberty does not say “Give me your angry blowhards”

Bob Murphey used to say, ‘You know, I feel so bad for atheists, I do. Think about it, no matter how smart they think they are, an atheist has to admit that he believes the equation: nobody plus nothing equals everything.’

How embarrassing for an intellectual to have to say ‘Yeah, I believe that. Nobody plus nothing equals everything.

How embarrassing indeed. However, the embarrassment is Gohmert’s as there has been an egregious failure of logic here.

After putting words in every atheist’s mouth by mocking “nothing” as an origin of everything, Gohmert then went on to invent his god out of nothing:

You couldn’t get everything unless there was something that was the creator of everything and that’s the Lord we know.

Whoa there cowboy! Because there is something there (which you have not proved) does not mean it’s the particular something you want to be there! One does not logically follow from the other. I know, I know, keep your expectations low, you are saying. He is only a Texas Republican after all.

But there can be no mercy. Return what is given is Heathen morality, so I am going to mock Gohmertian buffoonery at its source.

There are a myriad of other possibilities, Cowboy Louie: Shadee Ashtari at HuffPo pointed out that it could be the Flying Spaghetti Monster, for example. If we are going to insist on a divine source of creation, it could also be Great Cthulhu, or perhaps the Neoplatonic One, considered by intellectual Pagans of the Roman Empire to be the source of all creation.

Third century philosopher Plotinus says that when we look towards the One and realize its presence, we are at the happy end of our journey. We look upon the source of life and sing a choral hymn that is full of God (Enneads, 6.9).

Now doesn’t that sound nice, as compared to wanting to burn people at the stake, or stone them?

As the Italian philosopher Giovanni Reale eloquently describes Plotinus’ place in the philosophy:

(I)n the Plotinian system there is presented the most daring metaphysical attempt of antiquity,which shakes all the traditional arrangements and puts them in disarray: the hypostases and the world itself are only different grades of the Divine, on every level and in every respect. The One is in all, even if in a different way, according to the capacity each thing has to contain it, and the all is in the one.

It would be useful here to briefly examine the Neo-Platonic model of the universe so that you will know it when, like Gohmert, you see it. This model is commonly referred to as a process of “emanation” but as Giovanni Reale points out, “such a term is inadequate, insofar as it is the source of every kind of ambiguity and hence needs to be substituted for by the term “procession.”

Procession (exitus) is a metaphysical process by which the universe is created and held together by the First Principle of the Neoplatonists, the One. The Path of Return (reditus) is going back along the same path. If we illustrate the universe schematically we find the three hypostases: at the top is the One. Beneath this is Mind (Nous), which for Plotinus is an infinite and inexhaustible power which overflows and generates a hierarchically inferior reality, Soul.

There are three parts to the soul: the All-Soul, which contemplates – facing toward Mind (Nous) it sees the Good and becomes full of goodness through this “union.” This All-Soul contains the other two, and is ever in the realm of the intelligible along with Mind. In the middle is the Soul of the Universe, which produces the sensible world. The “extreme edge” of Soul, in the words of Plotinus, is the “aspect by which this Soul produces the physical world.”

The physical world (Nature) for Plotinus represents the extreme edge of the incorporeal world of the intelligible. In the Enneads, Plotinus explains that nature is not a “irrational productive activity” (to use the words of Reale), but a productive activity accompanied by reason “and in fact deriving from reason” (Enneads, 4:4:13). Elsewhere in the Enneads, Plotinus tells us that Nature is a logos which supplies rational forms to sensible matter (Enneads, 3.8.2). The sensible world – our world – then, is at the bottom of our model of procession.

We Heathens call it Midgard, or Middle Earth, but then our conception of the cosmos differs a little from that of Plotinus – or Gohmert.

While it is the world we are accustomed to functioning in, ours, according to Plotinus, is not the world of “true beings.” This world terminates at the bottom-most level of Soul. What comes below Nature are “the beginnings of the imitative.” The term “person” itself denotes a soul which uses a body. The body is simply a “fallen soul”, and the soul governs the body and is superior to – not trapped within it – a metaphysical link to the Absolute. This is a contact which, like the linking of the All Soul to Mind, never diminishes (Enneads 4.8.8).

I know this seems complicated, but when you see that there has to be a creator, isn’t it obvious? I mean, at least as obvious as three being equal to one and one being equal to three?

There is no need here to explore the Path of Return, now that we have proven Gohmert wrong, and you’re probably thankful. I used to joke that it doesn’t get better than Plato until it gets better than Plato, but I don’t think my philosophy professors appreciated my irreverence.

But hey, before we go, and because I’m a Heathen and I have the soap box, I wanted to point out that there is no reason not to call that creative force Odin. I will employ this nifty cartoon because it’s simple enough for even Gohmert to understand (unlike, say, Neoplatonism), and like all Vikings and their Gods (what, you haven’t seen Marvel’s Thor?), the characters have cool British accents:

You may ask why somebody – a polytheist – who thinks all gods are real would defend atheists, who beleive no gods are real. It’s a good question. I’ve been mocked by atheists on one hand and monotheists on the other. But it’s a free country, more or less.

Here’s the thing: So far as I know, atheists are not trying to legislate away my right to believe all gods are real and until they do, I will continue to defend their right to believe no gods are real. As Thomas Jefferson said, it doesn’t break my leg.

They are free meanwhile to think me stupid (and some of them, quite vocally, do). On the other hand, I am able to cordially return the feeling. That is the very meaning of toleration and true religious freedom. We don’t have to agree; we just have to tolerate each other. Gohmert doesn’t get that, and he doesn’t get America. But then, as you say, he’s only a Texas Republican.

References:

Giovanni Reale, The Schools of the Imperial Age (New York, 1990)

• Author
• Recent Posts

Hrafnkell Haraldsson

Hrafnkell Haraldsson, a social liberal with leanings toward centrist politics has degrees in history and philosophy. His interests include, besides history and philosophy, human rights issues, freedom of choice, religion, and the precarious dichotomy of freedom of speech and intolerance. He brings a slightly different perspective to his writing, being that he is neither a follower of an Abrahamic faith nor an atheist but a polytheist, a modern-day Heathen who follows the customs and traditions of his Norse ancestors. He maintains his own blog, A Heathen's Day, which deals with Heathen and Pagan matters, and Mos Maiorum Foundation www.mosmaiorum.org, dedicated to ethnic religion. He has also contributed to NewsJunkiePost, GodsOwnParty and Pagan+Politics.

Latest posts by Hrafnkell Haraldsson (see all)

• Resistance Leader Maxine Waters Receives Standing Ovation at MTV Movie Awards - Mon, May 8th, 2017
• A Desperate Trump Lashes Out As Sally Yates Prepares to Testify - Mon, May 8th, 2017
• Idaho Republican Claims ‘Nobody Dies Because They Don’t Have Access to Health Care’ - Mon, May 8th, 2017