Once upon a time, there was nothing, and an old guy decided, after eons of not thinking much of it, to create something, let’s call it the world for the sake of argument (the concept of universe had not really been invented back then, so it was just the world with a bunch of stars). He ended up with a flat surface needing some work before it could satisfy him (again, the concept of a round world hadn’t really been born at that time), so he started to fill it up with things.

Oh, wait, maybe that’s not how it happened!

Once upon a time, there was nothing and an old guy decided to create something, but you can’t create anything in the dark, right? Plus, even if he could, what’s the point of creating something no one can see anyway? So he started by creating light, and light created darkness right away, right then and there, where it didn’t reach. Yeah, I think that’s how it happened, because that’s just how physics works.

Now that he could see what he was doing (not knowing what he was doing is one of the characteristics he later shared with us, but I’m putting the cart in front of the horse, so bear with me), he continued by creating the world as indicated above, following the How to Create a World in Seven Days manual, badly translated, obviously, considering the end product, but again, I’m running ahead of myself.

Ok, so now, he had light and a world, and he liked his home project so far, but this wouldn’t be too impressive, plus he had all the time in the world (I forgot: he had also invented time when he created the world) so he decided to keep going.

He dried up some of this world in order to create beaches that could be used by tourists in the future (he might have been an old guy, but he certainly had thought of almost everything). On the other side, he would put all the fish later on, but let’s keep it simple for now. Now that he had some dry land (and let it be said that, due to the bad translation or to a lack of attention, or just senility, he would end up charring a big chunk of this dry land, turning it into pretty much useless desert), he set out to beautify it nicely.

First, he added grass and trees. He liked his wonderful idea — he was judge and jury, after all, so it figures. He created tons of all kinds of veggies, so by the time he was done, it was dark and he decided to continue the next day. He noticed then that he had overlooked one tiny detail: in the dark, it’s pretty tricky to find a place to rest, so he also needed to create more light for the night. Sure enough, an idea popped in his head, he sprinkled a bunch of tiny lights so he could find his way around and voilà. He even put a bigger one for effect, like a primitive disco ball of sorts.

As mentioned above, he then added all kinds of fish and also all kinds of animals to trim the grass and keep it tidy. Unfortunately, some animals started to eat other animals instead of grass, which most certainly was due to the said bad translation and not to an error in judgment or design flaw because, as everyone knows, the world was created using intelligent design. Sometimes, things just don’t work out the way we want and there’s nothing we can do about it but sigh.

And then… thank goodness I got to the end of the page and I’ll spare you the grisly details.

This story is about some immigrants that went to another country in pursuit of happiness, life and liberty, just like today’s immigrants. It could have been you or anyone else, but luck had it that it was them and not you this time around. If you just looked a few decades or centuries back, you’d find out that it was you or your forefathers doing the same thing. Anyway, as I say, this story is about them. Not just any them, but themness itself. This is the story of the most them of all: all of us.

Yes, all of us, because, maybe, the story meant to include all immigrants, i.e. you? Looks like the only non-immigrants are those coming from Africa after all and the rest of us should shut up and stop complaining. I know some readers would disagree with me, sticking to the literal meaning of the story as originally written, and who am I to call them unimaginative, uneducated or selfish? I’ll just call them “originalists” and be done with it.

The story goes like any other story, but this one was written in a book of stories and not in a history book, so we don’t really know how it went, even if we peeled off the most outlandish claims, like that of one angel of death getting rid in one single night of all of the first kids of every family from the host country, as this obviously would have required more than one angel and excellent logistics to not miss any of the guilty kids or killing by accident one of the innocent kids. Clearly, if in doubt, you wouldn’t want guilty kids sticking around.

This story has its hero, of course, like every Hollywood story worth its salt — which reminds me of another story about some curious woman, but this one is in the previous book and therefore doesn’t belong here. This hero was a lucky guy at first, well-fed and oblivious to the fate of the less fortunate, until one day he had a change of heart and all hell broke loose. What had been a fruitful owner/slave relationship (see the pyramids and other marvels we admire today) turned sour almost overnight for some odd reason. Some people are never happy.

Among the many tricks this magical hero performed, the highest point in his career was to convince his followers that a piece of desert just around the corner was the best real estate in the world, delusion that should be called, properly, a mirage, just like in every other desert, instead of the land of milk and honey. I’d definitely love to have this guy working for me in my used-car shop.

The story has a sweet and sour sauce added to it for extra exotic flavor — the main character didn’t make it to the end of the movie. The director’s cut required him to see the famous land briefly, though, in his old age, right before passing. This required a huge change to the format, from a film to a long TV series lasting 40 seasons, a record to this day.

I’d love to tell you the whole story, but unfortunately I don’t own a TV set. All I know is hearsay and you know that I, unlike others, don’t spread rumors. Especially on Friday, Saturday or Sunday.

I just know we’re all just a bunch of immigrants, that’s for sure.

Collectively known as the gospels, these four books are about the life and gruesome death of Yeshu’a, a.k.a. Jesus of Nazareth (for Jews), a.k.a. Jesus of Bethlehem (for Christians), a.k.a. Jesus Christ! (for everyone having a bad day). Since most people reading these pages, even non-Christians, live in a culture whose background is likely Christian, and since there’s no point in reiterating what everyone knows, we can bunch them together to save time and paper.

This said, there are some differences between them, as each had a different audience in mind:

• Mathew assumes his audience knows quite a bit of what Christians call the Old Testament, so scholars think the audience was probably Jews or ex-Jews in communities outside Israel/Judah.
• Mark, for his part, is thought to be the earliest version, even the source of much of the material included in the other gospels. It focuses on Yeshu’a’s words and miracles, resulting in a shorter version.
• Luke seems to write for gentiles (that’s how the Jews called the rest of humanity, the not-chosen people).
• John is, and this is key, the only one mentioning the turning of water into wine at a wedding. Who could forget to mention this first and most consequential of miracles? So we know the previous three writers were teetotalers and therefore untrustworthy, if you ask me. Alcohol might also explain the strange first few lines, although they could also be due to some philosophical inklings on the part of John, enhanced by wine, it goes without saying. We’ll let the scholars drink this one out.

I have a couple of questions, and I’ll ask for forgiveness from sensitive Christians in advance, but why did someone who’s preaching about love and forgiveness kill a fig tree which didn’t bear fruit out of season, i.e. when the poor guy wasn’t even supposed to bear fruit in the first place?, or how do you explain the forced suicide of a bunch of innocent bystander pigs off a cliff?, or the whipping of people at the temple — granted, not his favorite people, but yet, keep your cool and have some manners, especially at the temple, for god’s sake?

I’d say there are a few other unsavory incidents in the gospels, but I’ll gloss over them. Or better, I’ll ignore them, as one is not supposed to speak ill of the dead…

Oh!, wait a second!, he is still alive!