Category: Christianity

By on

As I get older, I have been thinking more of death and subsequently the afterlife. I have to say the afterlife really has little appeal to me. I mean it is eternity, for Christ’s sakes, what could I have against eternity. First, it is an awfully long time. Forever. It is kind of overwhelming.

Then there is the meeting all dead friends and relatives. This sounds good in theory but I a not sure the practice would meet my expectations. For example, my parents have been dead for over 20 years. Knowing them, they are already established in their afterlife and here I come along expecting to hang with them. Why would they want to raise me yet again? I was a lot of trouble the first time around and they have to show me the ropes yet again.

Or worse still, I will be met my Grandmother Schnell. She was a terribly unhappy woman on Earth and I can’t imagine that heaven would change her much. You are talking an eternity with a woman I avoided when she was alive. Sorry but I am not interested in an eternity with her.

Finally there is the eternity of church services. Praising God all day long 24/7/365. I could barely tolerate once a week when I was forced to attend services when I was a kid. Imagine an eternity of Sunday church services — bad singing, empty rituals, and haranguing sermons. Sounds very much like Hell to me. Maybe, just maybe, this is Hell especially for all those people who hated Church services. Think about it. What better way to punish these malcontents for an eternity.

But mostly it is the idea of having to learn everything all over again. Starting out all over again and learning a whole new system which doesn’t involve activities that I am particularly interested in. Things like drinking, sex, and goofing off with friends. Now that I could manage for an eternity but that isn’t what the brochure says about Heaven. Sorry, I just don’t think I have it in me.

By on

My parents were Catholic and so they took it up themselves to raise their five children as Catholics. In order to make this happen, I endured 12 years of Catholic schools. I am afraid the Catholic school system let them down terribly. On the plus side I acquired a pretty good working knowledge of the Bible and religious doctrines, at least, as understood by the Roman Catholic Church.

The first big roadblock to me continuing as a Catholic was I could never understand why Jesus Christ had to die for our sins. Nobody could really explain the reasoning. It hardly seems fair to have an innocent man die an incredibly violent death in order to save the souls of the worlds’ sinners.

Now, I get that something had to be done. The sinners were doomed for Hell but why God determined that the only way this could happen is for Jesus to die. Wait, I take it back, I really don’t understand why God created a world of sinners that needed Jesus to die in order to save them. Jesus whole death sentence is based in the failure of humanity to uphold God’s laws. Something he knew was going to happen when he created Adam and Eve.

Why does God need to have such suffering in order to say, well OK, Jesus died a horrible death, by dying, Jesus showed how much he loved human beings so I will give all human beings a second chance to get into Heaven. Even more troubling to me is that God knew Jesus would willingly die on the cross so even before He set all of this in motion, why bother?

I was in a Spanish Church with a Christian friend. We were marveling at the artwork which depicted Jesus on the cross when she said “you know he would do all again. Die for our sins.” Which,OK, given Christian Myth, true. But why? This wonderment that Jesus would willingly suffer death to redeem man leaves out the important question, at least for me. God could ask anything, certainly less painful methods of execution, yet he demanded death, a rather unpleasant death at that. Why?

Based on this fundamental tenant of Christian faith, why would I believe that God is a loving God. He sounds more like a sadist to me. Pain and suffering is a part of the plan. Dear God, why?

By on 1 Comment

One of the things that bothers me about American Christianity is the delight they take in punishing people on earth when they have already decided these sinners are doomed to an eternity in Hell. This vail of tears is relatively short time and, and lets be honest here, there is only a good 20 to 30 years of really good sinning in an average person’s life, giving most people plenty of time for last minute repenting. leaving Christians plenty of opportunity to salvage some of these hell bound souls.

So why can’t they just give us these earthly delights knowing full well that, good Christians that they are, they will have an eternity in Heaven while everyone else is going to Hell. But no, Christians can’t be happy with an eternity in Hell, they want to make us miserable even before we descend into the fiery pit which is downright petty of them. My theory on this is that they are afraid sinning will look like too much fun and they won’t be able to compete with us sinners. Understandable but isn’t it really relevant to God’s decision making process. I mean God knows what is in a person’s heart. So, if in your heart you are a man who wants to dress up in women’s clothing, God knows this and even if you never put on a wig, go go boots and a leather mini skirt, God will punish the you accordingly. Which, on careful consideration, is also a good reason to go ahead and go for the full Drag Queen experience. I mean if you are going to Hell whether you do it or not, you might as well do it.

Here is the thing. God will take care of the sinners. All you need to do is make sure your are right with God and I think God commanded Christians to Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. If you heart has harden to such a point that you delight in seeing sinners go to Hell, you might have some explaining to do when you meet your maker. I would love to hear the explanation but I think I might be suffering from heat exhaustion.

By on

We are all sinners. This is one Christian teaching I have admired as it humbles, or it should humble, Christians when they are tempted to judge other people. Pope, Prince and Pauper — we are all sinners. It is the great equalizer. Christians would be wise to keep this teaching in mind instead of throwing their moral superiority around to influence public thinking. Unfortunately they rarely do. Instead they divide the world into two camps — Christians and everybody else. Moral people versus heathens. This type of American Christian enjoys pointing out everyone else sins and, because heathens continue to sin, these Christians are committed to making sinners lives as miserable as possible.

This divisive thinking among American Christians can be seen on a daily basis but a particularly vivid example of it occurred the other in the Florida Legislature. Republicans there passed a law saying that they don’t have to treat anyone if they disagree with them on moral grounds. The intention, as I understand it, is to enable doctors to refuse treatment of patients who they find morally dubious.

I am confused because aren’t these same Republicans and Christians complaining about cancel culture. They want to be able to be disagree on subjects like transgender treatment for children without fear of retribution from trans activists who would view this as transphobic. Since their stated goal is an open society where anyone can speak their mind freely without fear, its particularly annoying that whenever they get control of a legislature they try to cancel the groups that fails their morality tests. A morality test that is pretty much focused on people Christians view as sexually deviant. They aren’t complaining about treating robbers, rapists, adulterers and con men. Their focus is on doctors being forced to treat gay and trans people.

I didn’t know they were being forced to now. This is the first I heard of it. I would think if this is a widespread problem that the outrage machine at Fox News would have spread the news far and wide. Are any doctors in Florida complaining about being forced to take on Drag Queens and Trans patients? Don’t doctors have a pretty easy way of taking on patients they approve of without making much of a scene. If I call a doctor for an appointment and the receptionist catches my gay lisp, they can just say the doctor isn’t taking new patients and I wouldn’t be the least bit suspicious to hear that. It happens all the time. There is no need to get into a conversation about morality much less a law suit. As with many issues that the Republican Party take on, this isn’t a problem. It is a show tune song to please their constituents and not because there is a problem. Florida Republicans have made a mountain out of no hill. It does give the illusion of movement and that is all these legislators want.

Another big problem with this startling ill-considered law is it is so broadly written that non-Christians can use it too. This will be its undoing. What is to stop a Gay Doctor from saying I believe that Christian Republicans are evil and I refuse to take them on as patients. What happens if there is a mass casualty event and the police bring in the wounded gunman, can a doctor decline to treat him because he disapproves of murder? Would Emergency Rooms across Florida have to staff a cross section of faiths, sexual identities and political persuasions to accommodate all the different political and religious passions that inspire disapproval? Where exactly does this end?

What we have here is a solution to something that isn’t even a problem. Nothing will change. Doctors will carry on doing what doctors do without having any patients forced on them. Nobody will see the difference because nothing needed to change. There will be legal battles because, of course, this is what it is all about. Republicans want somebody to challenge this law so they can point how unreasonable their political opponents are because, of course, some Trans Activists will take the bait and bring suit.

It is a lot of fuss for nothing. Most doctors will treat any patient they have without question. If a person wants a gender reassignment, I am pretty certain that most Christian doctors aren’t experts in that particular field and will have to refer them to another doctor any way. Most gay people want a doctor they feel they can talk freely to and will choose someone who is sympathetic to them.

If there is a problem then I suggest these Christian doctors remember the teaching that we are all sinners. Every patient that a doctor treats has sinned and is going to continue sinning every day for the rest of their lives. They will sin because they are human. In the mean time, a body is a body. If you have the power to make someone feel better why not do it? What would Jesus do?

By on

I believe that Christians are so hypersensitive about gay/trans grooming is they do so much grooming of their own that they can’t believe other groups aren’t doing the same. Christian grooming is so pervasive that any attempt to reign in Christianity is seen as hostility towards Christianity. When they are asked to stop their proselytizing, particularly in public spaces, they see this as hostility as opposed to equal treatment of religion. There are now substantial numbers of pagans, Jews, Muslims and Hindus in the mix. With this type of diversity, it is best, in the interest of fairness, to eliminate religion from the public sphere. It is after all the Constitution that binds Americans together and not a specific religion.

The problem, then, is that Christians see this diminution in access to public spaces is somehow hostility to Christianity. But how? Are Christians forbidden from practicing their religion anywhere in the United States? Do they get thrown in prison for going to church services? Are they discriminated against if they apply for jobs? Are they put in large arenas and fed to lions? I am pretty certain that the hostility, in no way, matches these more hostile examples of the treatment of Christians. They just don’t happen in the United States.

A recent Supreme Court case found that it is legal for a football coach (in other words a public school teacher) to lead his team in prayer after the game. The majority opinion was that a little prayer is neutral. It give some comfort to the Christians in the audience and does no harm to the non-believers. All right then if a prayer is neutral, which runs counter to Christian thinking by the way, why worry about it if it isn’t included in a public space. Why argue about it at all then? Nothing is stopping the Christian players from getting together and praying and leaving the non-Christians out of it. But the non-believers aren’t forced to participate? It is up to the individual whether they participate. Well, yes, but when the person in charge of your team is praying, there might be an impetus to participate in the prayer in order to stay in his good graces.

Would the Court feel the same if they coach decided to exercise his first amendment rights to free speech if he decided to talk about Trans Rights. Indeed, we know that many states have curtailed teachers from engaging in this particular form of free speech. So talking about Trans people is grooming and wrong while praying is free speech and positive for Christians and neutral for everyone else. This begs the question who is the prayer for — the Christian children or the pagan children. If for the Christian children, it is hardly necessary. These children should be praying at home it their parents are so devout and, if they aren’t praying at home, why should I think it is so important to make these children pray after the football game? This leaves the pagan children who may not know anything about Christianity and who’s parents don’t want them to know anything about Christianity. Why do they need to see prayer? Because it is good? Because Christians are good? Because Christians don’t encourage transgender children to act on their feelings?

I can hear Christians getting exasperated with my arguments. No one is forcing the non-believers to prayer. The non-believers can keep respectfully silent while the Christians pray. Wait. Why? If you are expressing your first amendment rights to prayer on public property why do I have to respect you for that? If you are praying in your church, sure I have to respect you? But if you are praying on public lands, I owe you nothing. I can scream as loud as I want, interfere with your prayers in any way I see fit because you are actively grooming children to be Christians. You believe it is neutral and harmless, others may not believe the same thing. Why should the non-believers stand idly by while you foist your beliefs on others? What’s the harm in a little prayer? Well, then what is the harm in a little Satanic chant?

If you want to pray, have at it. Pray all you want but if you do it audibly in a public space, know that you are irritating me and thus are harming me. You can’t claim a Christian prayer is both neutral to non-believers and good for believers. Your aim is to influence non-believing children and that, by your own definition, is grooming and wrong. So stop it.