Don't Call It Love

This is from an amazing essay on why fatherhood made a man reject Christianity:

The second realization came when my young son began to realize what death was, and connected what he heard of Hell and demons in church. He became terrified of his parents dying, and then his death, and then everlasting torture. I opened my mouth to explain the sacrifice of the Lamb, and why he'll never see Hell if he loved Jesus and then it hit me like a freight train.

As a father, I was about to tell my terrified son the fairy tale equivalent of this: "If he didn't want to end up locked in a dark, dank basement filled with spiders and child molesters and murderers, then he should love me with all his heart and soul, and if I believed he was sincere, then I wouldn't lock him down there forever. I would tell him I sacrificed myself to work very hard for him, and that I was giving him this gift of a chance to live upstairs with me forever. However, if he didn't want it, then it was out of my hands and he would have to go to the basement and be locked in there, away from the warm beacon of my love forever."

I couldn't tell my child this. I couldn't tell him that invisible demons were real.

Christians always want to tell me about god's love. God loves me, I should love him back. He loves me so much, he created me. He loves me so much he sacrificed himself to himself to change a rule he himself made. He loves me so much that if I don't love him properly, he'll send me to Hell forever and I will be tortured for all eternity . . . um, wait, that's not love.

I would never, never ever ever, do that to anyone I love. I wouldn't do that to anyone I hate. I wouldn't do that to anyone at all. That's not love. Love is the desire to protect someone, to see them happy, to see them safe. Love is not punishment and torture. Love is not threats and pain. Love is patient, love is kind . . . how the fuck is that the same book about the same person, anyway?

"Oh, but you hurt god by not loving him back." I've heard that one more than once. Yes, I have loved someone who did not love me back. It sucks. It hurts and it's humiliating and no one likes rejection. I still wouldn't torture the object of my unreturned affection just because they didn't love me back. That's no part of love.

"Well, how can you comprehend the divine?" That's a better explanation, in a way. How could I possibly understand the motivations of an omnipotent, omniscient being? Just immortality alone would change how you see things, let alone having the ability to create universes. I could not understand god.

I do understand this, however, love is patient, love is kind, it is not jealous or boastful or proud. Those things are true. If it is not patient and not kind, if it is jealous, boastful or proud, it is not love. And torture, even one second of torture, let alone an eternity, is no part of love. So stop calling it that. Your god as you imagine him does not love anyone, by his own definition in his own book.

Speshul Little Snowflakes, Aren't They All

It's been a while since I was 12 (23 years, to be exact), but I do recall the Great Band Shirt Wars of '87. If you were alive and aware in 1987, you're already laughing. If not, pull up a chair while I tell you a story, whippersnapper.

1987 was a glorious time, filled with big, frizzy hair, tight acid washed jeans, tube tops and neon lipstick worn unironically. It was also the Age of Metal.* Every teenager listened to ridiculous bands like Iron Maiden and Napalm Death, and the T-Shirts were epic. If your T-shirt didn't include offensive language and offensive imagery of (a) violated women, or (b) death, or (c) women violated by death, you were a loser. (Back then, we called losers "nerds". Times have changed.)

So, basically every junior high and high school student wore these shirts to school, and the school dealt with it one of three ways: you had to turn the shirt inside out, you had to cover the offensive language with masking tape, or you could go home. Every single morning, the school staff wasted at least 30 minutes of their time policing T-shirts. Looking back on it all, the entire teenage population of the 80s owes their teachers flowers and sincere apology for being such jackasses.

I bring this up so you'll know exactly how I feel about this bullshit:

Michelle Ramirez was pulled out of class at North Kirkwood Middle School in Kirkwood, Mo., on Wednesday for wearing a T-shirt that read, “JESUS, HE SCARES THE HELL OUT OF YOU.”

Administrators claimed that under the Kirkwood dress code policy, the use of the word “hell” was inappropriate and vulgar, according to the principal and school district officer Ginger Fletcher.

Reported by FOX 2 news, Fletcher stated, “Outside the school environment, it might be fine. Anything within the school that… might create a disruption in the school, we’ll ask the student to modify the garment.”

Okay. So the exact same thing that was going on back when I was 12. Except that Fox News didn't report on anyone's Voivod shirt.

While the school considered the use of “hell” a “slang” word that might be offensive to other students, Ramirez and her family all stood by the belief that the word hell denotes a place, not a slang.

“I don’t think it’s a slang word because it’s all capitalized, and even though the ‘HELL’ is a different color, it still means the same thing: That he does scare the hell out of you, that you’re not letting the devil in,” responded Ramirez, who received the shirt from her youth group that specializes in extreme messages to promote their beliefs.

“To us, hell is a place… It’s not… She’s not using it as a slang. So if she’s not using it as a slang, then the shirt should be okay,” commented her mother, Christina Ramirez. [emphasis mine]

Oh, c'mon. So the shirt deliberately seeks to take advantage of "hell" having a few different meanings, one of them somewhat obscene, in order to draw attention, but drawing attention was not the point and she should be allowed to draw attention with questionable language even though everyones else does not have that right.

I'd say to grow up, but her parents have decided that HELL is a religious symbol.

“It’s federal law that you cannot ask a student to remove an emblem, insignia, or garment including a religious emblem,” the Christina Ramirez further explained to FOX.

Honestly. That's just . . . I expect a 12 year old to come up with that sort of logic, but her mother?

And then they decided that HELL is not a protected religious symbol.

Though Ramirez and her family felt a double standard in the school’s position, where other classmates wore shirts with gang insinuations – one shirt even reading, “We kick balls” – she stated that she would not wear the shirt to school again after she and her father read a passage in the Bible on Thursday that said Jesus respected the law of the land.

Aw, poor little speshul snowflakes.

*|..|

You're Enjoying This Way Too Much.

Last week, I happened to catch the local news and they showed a dog whose owner had abused it, quite creatively and for a long time. As dogs will, it recovered and now has a very nice home filled with toys and treats. For a brief instant, I wanted the ability to rip someone's spleen out of their body and shove it down their throat. It was the video of the dog's tail, weakly wagging at its rescuer that drove me over the top. After all that, a dog will still trust people to make things better.

Rage, I understand. Vengeance, oh, I grok that.

This, not so much. It's a treatise on hell and hell and fiery punishment- everlasting- and I've seen it all before, until we got to this:

"Some people think that hell will only be experienced by the inner consciousness. But hell will be experienced by the body, too. Transcendent, eternal bodies are going to be given to the damned; they will suffer in those bodies forever.

Um . . . oooookaaaay. Why? Why would God, maker of heaven and earth, omnipotent and omniscient, need to give me a new "transcendent" body in order to torment me? It seems a bit, what's the word I'm looking for? Unnecessary? Sadistic? Bizarre?

Seriously, what is going on in the writer's mind that that makes sense and seems worthy of worship?

And this, regarding the degrees of hell:

"So, hell will be a place of unrelieved torment of body and soul in varying degrees. John Gerstner said, "Hell will have such severe degrees that a sinner were he able would give the whole world if his sins could be one less."

Really? After eternity? I guess that's why we have to have new, transcendent bodies, because in this current one, you can get used to anything inside of a few minutes, depending upon what it is, so I give it 1,000 years at the outside before everyone is hell is all "meh, whatever, just another day of fiery torment."

This makes no sense at all:

God never meant for hell to be for people. He made it for the devil and his angels. But people choose to go to hell by rejecting Christ. Some souls are suffering that torment right now, and have been waiting for their resurrected bodies for thousands of years. But even after they receive their transcendent bodies, they will be no closer to the end of eternal punishment than when they first entered hell. No wonder Jesus had to teach about hell!

God never meant for hell to be for people? God's omniscient, right? If he is, the above statement makes no fucking sense at all. Not one bit. If he isn't, well, that kicks the rest of your theology in the teeth. Either way, stoopid.

And, just to amuse myself, God and I talk transcendent, eternal bodies:

God: Here you go!

Me: Hey, neat, what's this?

God: That's your new, transcendent, eternal body.

Me: What does "transcendent" even mean in that context?

God: You know, tranning scendents.

Me: What?

God: Never mind, what do you think of it?

Me: Well . . . I'm a little underwhelmed, to be honest.

God: What? Why? It's transcendent, it's eternal!

Me: I was really hoping to get something better than this. This is just a human body. Like many others. Much like the one I used to have. Do you have anything in Jägermonster?

God: What?

Me: I was thinking gold, with red eyes and red hair. Maybe gold streaks in the hair. Of course, shark's teeth and long, pointed ears, and inch-long claws. That's just standard. I'd be equally satisfied either way with horns, but I'd really rather not be covered in fur.

God: Seriously?

Me: Transcendent!

Nothing Is True, Everything Is Permitted*

Vox Nova is the Catholic Slacktivist. The contributor(s) are unashamedly liberal, deeply concerned for the poor and the suffering, welcome nonCatholics with open arms and preach understanding and tolerance over bigotry and hatred. You can imagine how that goes over in the Catholic blogosphere. You can also imagine that I like Vox Nova very much.

So it's not this post I am snarking on, I happen to agree that atheists have morals like everyone else, it's the inevitable "atheists so do not have morals and Hitler was an atheist and that proves my point!" (I have no idea why, but Vox Nova comments always set the land record for fastest unrelated idea to Godwinning.)

David, you are correct that many atheists do live moral lives, however my point was that there is nothing in atheist belief, or non-belief if you will that compels them to do so.

Doesn't that make us better than Christians? Think about this for a second. Chris here is living his life to attain heaven and avoid hell. At best, that's enlightened self interest. If I believed in hell and someone had a good argument that wearing hats made out of green jello was the only guaranteed way to avoid hell, you'd better believe my head would be covered in green jello at all times. Really, Chris' behavior is just like a person who stops at every stop light, even at 4am when no one else is around and you're waiting for nothing. You wait to avoid the possibility of getting a ticket. Chris behaves to avoid hell.

I, on the other hand, have no hell to avoid and no heaven to attain. I act morally because . . . well, it really doesn't occur to me to do otherwise. I bleed for the poor, the downtrodden, the abused and rejected because I know how that feels and "good" isn't in it. I help where I can because I have benefited from help, and to inspire others to help because the world needs more of that. But I'm not expecting anything out of it.

So who's the better person, Chris?

No one can judge one a “bad atheist” in the same way they can identify one as a bad Christian for example.

Ummm . . . I'm not really sure what that means, to be honest. A bad person is a bad person, Christian, atheist or otherwise. If he means a substandard atheist, I guess that would be an atheist who worships occasionally.

There are standards and norms by which one can judge one’s life to be a sound example of following Christ or not, but to one who denies God, there is really no such set of norms on which to judge them, at least not on moral grounds. They can easily change the rules of morality, as Stalin, Hitler and notable others have done to justify their barbarity in the name of a subjectively defined good; a master race, proletarian rights, etc.

Chris, anyone can change the rules to suit themselves. Neither belief in god nor god hisownself stops Christians from doing so. You want some "notable others" to add to your Godwin? How about every Catholic priest who molested children? You can't diddle children without changing your morals to suit yourself. (Hopefully.) How about every pastor who embezzled from their church? How about those Crusaders who spread war and death and torture across the Middle East to spread the word of a god who said that the meek shall inherit the Earth?

How about them, Chris?

*That quote is apocraphally attributed to Hassan i-Sabbah, and is quite a bit more difficult and thought provoking than a first look reveals.

**It's Simile Monday here in Hell! Feel free to add your own.

Death, I Do Hope It's Cooler Than I Think

Unrelated, but really cool. And really real.

My own personal feeling on death is that you die, and that's it. It's an end. There's no afterlife, no haunting people, no heaven, no hell. I don't fear this, because there's to fear in this idea. Does anyone think a rock is afraid of it's fate? Because if I'm right, you have as much awareness as a rock after you die.

I am aware that I may be somewhat influenced by my own chronic pain in this belief. I've been in pain for so long I can't remember not being in pain. Actually, I can't imagine not being in pain. If I woke up tomorrow not in pain, not any, not at all, I'd probably be so freaked out I'd start screaming and need a serious amount of Ativan to stop.

So it's probably not possible for me to picture eternity with any happiness, but that's not what makes me think death is an end. I think death is an end because there's no evidence otherwise. There's no scientific, verifiable, falsifiable evidence of continuation of consciousness after physical death. There's lots of stories about it. Every culture has or had at least one. But preponderance of fanciful tales is not truth. There's innumerable tales about vampiric and werewolfian creatures, too, and I don't often run into people trying to get me to join their vampire worshipping club.

I have been accused of believing death is an end because I want to. Because of my physical pain. Because I don't want to believe in hell, therefore I reject any afterlife at all. That's not true.

I'd like to believe in an afterlife. It would be nice to think that all the people I love, all the people I admire, all the good people in the world get to hang out in paradise forever. That would be awesome, for a while anyone. I think boredom would set in fairly quickly, but that's just me.

I'd like to be wrong about this. I'd like to die and find myself at the Pearly Gates, and there's the Slacktivist (I think he's older than me, so I'm not wishing him dead before his time) and we meet and have a good laugh about my atheism being proven wrong so dramatically. And then we go play Dance Central with Moses and Socrates.

That'd be cool. But just because something would be cool doesn't make it true. Nor does wanting something to be true make it true.

Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time

A short story inspired by John Loftus' post, What Must Be the Case if Christianity Is True

4) That the highest created being, known as Satan or the Devil, led an angelic rebellion against an omnipotent omniscient omnibenelovent omnipresent God, and expected to win--which makes Satan out to be pure evil and dumber than a box of rocks.

Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time, a conversation between Satan and Satan's second in command, Bob.

Bob: So, we're rebelling against God?

Satan: Yes.

Bob: Why? He's omnibenevolent. You can't get nicer than that.

Satan: Apparently, I'm wicked jealous of the humans.

Bob: Those things that feel pain, get sick and die? We're angels, why are we jealous of humans?

Satan: Two words- free will.

Bob: Well, if we're deciding to rebel, we must have that, too.

Satan: Better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven.

Bob: Have you seen Hell?!

Satan: I admit, the decor is a little heavy on the burning lakes of fire and, well, burning lakes of fire, but we could always redecorate.

Bob: I don't think new wallpaper is going to fix that. Anyway, how can we rebel? God isn't just omnibenelovent, he's also omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent.

Satan: Hmmm . . . if he's omnipresent, doesn't that mean he rules Hell, too?

Bob: Yes.

Satan: Omniscient means he's hearing this conversation right now.

Bob: Uh-huh

Satan: Omnipotent means I can't win, right?

Bob: I don't know, you got anything better than all powerful?

Satan: This probably isn't a good idea.

Bob: Nope. So, how much apologizing do you think it's going to take to fix this one?

Satan: We may as well just keep rebelling, I don't think Hallmark makes that card.

Bob: *sigh* I'll go get some wallpaper samples, sir.

Satan: See if they have anything in tone-on-tone stripes. Those are classy!

Bob: Right away, sir.

What's the Difference between My Philosophy and Yours?

My best guess as to what happens when we die is nothing. Neural function ceases, without neural function one cannot thing or feel or be, so . . . nothing. This doesn't scare me, because if I'm gone, just absolutely gone, I can't very well be afraid or lonely or in pain, anymore than my desk is ever afraid or lonely or in pain.

This is, of course, just an educated guess. The evidence seems to point that way, but I won't find out until I get there.

Oddly, there doesn't seem to be much difference between my beliefs on what happens when you're dead and the Christian belief. (Stick with me.)

Anyhow, I was wondering...many of us still have concerns for family and friends who are unsaved. I've read more than one post on this site where people have hoped that Christ will be patient and that we'll have more time before His return in hopes that some loved ones may still yet be saved....

When we get to heaven will we miss them or grieve for them? The Bible tells us that there will be no more saddness or tears...it seems hard for my tiny little human mind to envision people NOT being sad for a daughter, wife, husband, mom etc etc who will spend eternity in the other place...

You know what? That's an excellent question. And a really annoying way of expressing "I don't know*". Really, how is heaven heavenly if you spend all your time being sad about your loved ones in hell? Talk about survivor's guilt!

I feel the same way. I do believe that we will remember them no more. Like you said it is very hard for us to comprehend that while we are still here on earth. I will let someone with more biblical knowledge then myself apply scripture to your question. I can only pray that those that I love who have already passed away DID accept His free gift to us. I have my doubts as to my dad's salvation and also my maternal grandparents as well as a favorite aunt.

Remember them no more? So, your heaven is like my nothing much? Also, what kind of person seriously considers that their "favorite" aunt is being eternally tortured right this minute with such sanguinity?

Answer: Many people say that the first thing they want to do when they arrive in heaven is see all their friends and loved ones who have passed on before them. In eternity, there will be plenty of time to see, know, and spend time with our friends and family members. However, that will not be our primary focus in heaven. We will be far more occupied with worshipping God and enjoying the wonders of heaven. Our reunions with loved ones are more likely to be filled with recounting the grace and glory of God in our lives, His wondrous love, and His mighty works. We will rejoice all the more because we can praise and worship the Lord in the company of other believers, especially those we loved on earth.

Doesn't answer the question and doesn't sound like fun. "Recounting the grace and glory of god in our lives"? I'd rather set my gums on fire.

The bolded part is the crux of the matter. God says that His ways are not our ways and His thoughts are not our thoughts. We aren't capable of understanding and rationalizing everything about God. I have a hard time rationalizing God Himself, I have a hard time rationalizing Jesus performing the miracles He did, I can't rationalize living with a sinless and inccoruptable body forever...............in fact, alot of my "understanding" is based 100% on faith because for the things I can't "wrap my head around", my faith is my eyes and my "reasoning". Alot of times we just have to step out in faith and leave it at that.

I'll take "Ineffable for $200, Alex."

I think heaven will be such a joyful place that, the pain of knowing others who didn't make it will be grounded out.... I thank God that all my family are saved, but I do have alot of friends who are not yet saved at this point, and it does concern me, but when the rapture takes place will our joy in the presence of the Lord be robbed because they chose not to follow God?... I doubt it.

So that's what that third prong is for! Effectively, either you're as brain dead in heaven as you are in my scenario, or you're a selfish, selfish fuck who's so happy about winning you don't care what the penalty for losing is.

*My mother asked me last week what IDK means. Without thinking, I replied, "I don't know" and the conversation devolved into an Abbot and Costello routine from there.

Heaven?

The Bible makes precious little mention of Hell, so I decided to see what, exactly, the Bible says about Heaven.

In the Old Testament, Heaven is referenced often: as a place above Earth where rain comes from and Yhwh lives. There is not, however, any real description of Heaven, nor any intimation of people other than Yhwh living there. Well, stars and clouds clearly live there, but not people.

By the New Testament, we have a "kingdom of Heaven" and dead people going there, but nothing to tell me what it might be like there, which is a rather important thing to leave out, considering what I am expected to do to get to Heaven.

There's a bit of this:

Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed
good seed in his field. 25But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and
sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26When the wheat sprouted and formed
heads, then the weeds also appeared.

So, Heaven's got bad stuff in it?

31He told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed,
which a man took and planted in his field. 32Though it is the smallest of all
your seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a
tree, so that the birds of the air come and perch in its branches."

It started small, but got bigger?

33He told them still another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that
a woman took and mixed into a large amount[b]
of flour until it worked all through the dough."

What?

45"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls.

Oh, c'mon!

47"Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the
lake and caught all kinds of fish.

So, back to there's stuff in Heaven you may not like?

18"I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be[a]bound
in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[b]
loosed in heaven.

So, fantastic, there's war and suffering in Heaven? I hope you're not expecting a great deal of effort on my part to get there. I can experience all that has been loosed on Earth with no effort at all.

1"For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the
morning to hire men to work in his vineyard.

I'm starting to get the impression that whoever wrote this had no idea how to describe Heaven and went for the Emperor's New Clothes style of description: You must be stupid if you don't know what landowners and yeast have to do with Heaven.

I will leave you with this:

35Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

So, not so much on the "eternal" part of eternal life? Fuck it, I ain't hating gays for this.

I Do Appreciate Your Honesty

fundy, hell, christian, jesus

Did you ever talk to someone for a while, and at first they seem totally normal, but after a while you realize they are batshit crazy? You've have been having a great time, and then they start talking about their UFO abduction, or FEMA reeducation camps, or skinning their neighbor's puppy, and now you have to leave as politely, and quickly, as possible, that kind of thing?

Fundys do that to me.

First let me say that I don't revel in anyone spending their eternity in hell. We are to love everyone and pray for the salvation of all, even though that's a pretty hard thing to do sometimes . . .

followed by

But there's always been people who reject Jesus and His incredible offer of grace, mercy, restoration, and salvation. And as I read one article after another about avowed secularists, atheists, evolutionists, jihdists, and other "ists" that boldly and defiantly shake their fists at God, I know that one day, as God's Word says they will, bend their knee, and with their tongues, proclaim that Jesus Christ is Lord to the Glory of God the Father. I can't help but think about Osama bin Laden, a murdering jihadist and hater of Israel, bending his knee to a Jewish King Jesus.*

Or Hockmydinnerjacket**, who furiously shakes his fist as a hate-filled Holocaust denier, kneeling before a Jewish Carpenter sitting at God's right hand and confessing with his tongue that the very God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob (all of Israel) is the one True God and that Jesus is Lord to the glory of God.

I think about Richard Dawkins, an avowed God-denier, atheist, and evolutionist as he kneels before the very one that he led so many away from, as he confesses Jesus Lord to the glory of God the Father. I can go on and on. And as they are each sadly led away to an eternity of horror, punishment, and torment that our minds cannot even begin to comprehend, they will have full cognition of the truth of who God is and all that they have done and the punishment that awaits.

Christianity, it's all about the love. and the eternal torment. and watching the eternal torment. lovingly.

*Paragraphs added because I like you.

**Ahmedinejad. Is it that hard to say? Ach-mah-din-eh-jhad. Start slowly, work your way up.

How Is God Different From Hitler?

christianity, hitler, hell, holocaust, god, jesus, comfort

When evaluating beliefs, it's sometimes useful to stretch them out to their most outrageous conclusion and see what you end up with. Once Saved Always Saved* theology turns monstrous fairly quickly when you do this. You can end up with a child molester spending eternity in heaven while his victims spend eternity in hell.

You can end up with every Jew killed in the Holocaust burning in hell while Hitler enjoys heaven.

To any thinking, moral person, this is offensive. Immediately, punched-in-the-gut offensive. Yet, at the very least, believers in OSAS are forced to defend it, though most of them will proudly state, "Oh, Anne Frank? Burning hell**. Hitler, he could be in heaven. I don't know." So, basically, Auschwitz was just a little taste of what god is meting out to them right now. Nice. You sick fucking psychopaths.

Ray Comfort's The Eternal Destiny of the Jew attempts to deal with the issue, though it's really just a rehash of "we're all sinners, you need Jesus, burn in hell", but what's really interesting are the various defenses on the part of the fundy commentors.

Rock Sprites said...
Ryan Anderson said:

"Will you concede that Hitler COULD have found salvation at the end?"

Yes, just like anyone else

I can't decide if she just hasn't thought the issue through, or if the idea of a man responsible for the deaths of tens of millions in heaven while his innocent victims burn in hell is totally okay with her. She said that like I would say, "well, yes, Hitler may have enjoyed tea as much as anyone else." Say that sort of thing to normal people and they won't like tea quite as much anymore. But Rock Sprites is totally cool with spending eternity with Hitler.

Starbuck said...

And just because you were a victim of murder does not negate the fact you are a sinner. If you don't have Christ, then you don't have life. It's simple. Stop with the emotional victim being sent to hell because they refused Christ.

All stories of someone going to hell is sad. All of them. That isn't what God wants. God does NOT take pleasure in the destruction of the wicked. He is saddened by it. So take that God gleefully sends poor innocent people to hell and STUFF IT. It isn't even remotely true. The only ones in hell will be sinners and deserve it. But not everyone who deserves it will get hell.

If you don't like it. So? What are you going to do about it? A much more powerful angel has been trying to thwart God for atleast 6000 years, maybe longer. He will lose. What makes you so high and mighty to say the crap you say about God? He really does wish you would come to him. But you won't because you think you are smart and strong and he doesn't exist.

Well, so what? You end up in hell... SO WHAT?!

First of all, Holocaust victims were a little more than murder victims. Sure, some were shot right off the bat, but most were starved and tortured first. It's a matter of degree. Secondly, so what? Damn straight, so what about all those people spending forever and ever and ever being tortured forever? Who cares about that? It's boring, really. You scare me, Starbuck.

And if god is so very saddened by about 80% of humanity ending up in hell, why doesn't he do something about it? He is omnipotent, you know. Way to typecast the omnipotent being as a victim in all this.

I just can't see being okay with the idea of billions of people, most of whom did nothing wrong, suffering as Holocaust victims did for all eternity, especially when that idea is held concurrently with the idea that a man like Hitler could very well be enjoying the rewards of heaven. It's mind-boggling. It's horrible. It's the opposite of moral.

It's Christianity.

*OSAS is the essence of fundy theology. Essentially, once you "accept Jesus into your heart", that's it. You're going to heaven. It doesn't matter what you did before you were saved, or even what you do after, just as long as you're saved.

**Fundys will occasionally attempt to weasel out of this by stating that "we don't know" what Anne Frank or 6,000,000 other Jews believed at their deaths, but I find it unlikely that people who were tortured at the hands of nominal Christians for the crime of being Jewish converted to Christianity en masse. Highly unlikely.

It's Not Her Faith, It's Child Abuse

amanda voydatch, home schooling, public, schools, bible, religion, hell,
A lot, and I do mean a lot, has been made of the case of Amanda Voydatch, a 10-year-old homeschooler ordered by the Court in New Hampshire to attend public school this year. The general Christian consensus can be summed up by the mother's lawyer, John Simmons.

Although there is no dispute that Amanda is excelling academically and is generally interactive with her peers, her religious beliefs were seen as being held a bit too sincerely, Alliance Defense Fund allied attorney John Anthony Simmons explained to The Christian Post.

"What this has become is an assault on the child’s faith," Simmons said.

Except that it's not. What this case revolves around is an assault on the child herself.

The court order* stated: "According to the guardian ad litem's further report and testimony, the counselor found Amanda to lack some youthful characteristics. She appeard to reflect her mother's rigidity on questions of faith." The guardian noted that during a counseling session, Amanda tried to witness to the counselor and appeared "visibly upset" when the counselor purposefully did not pay attention.

The guardian also noted that Amanda's relationship with her father suffered because she did not think he loved her as much as he said he did due to the fact that he refused to "adopt her religious beliefs."

That's typical divorced parent child abuse bullshit and it has nothing to do with religion. "Daddy doesn't love you as much as I do." "If mommy really loved you, she'd blahblahblah."

Daddy doesn't love you as much as I do because he doesn't love Jesus the right way.

That's abusive, plain and simple. I'll bet mommy followed that up with "Daddy's going to hell!" Oh, wait, I just read the Court Order in its entirety, and yes, she did.

Can you imagine being 10 years old and believing that (a) Daddy doesn't love you and (b) Daddy's going to hell? Frankly, I think the mother is lucky the Judge didn't change custody on her.



*Properly spelled "Court Order" and it is fascinating reading.

Pimping Dead People for Jesus

jesus, heaven, hell, michael jackson, farrah fawcett, ed mcmahon
I've seen this sort of thing more than a few times in the last week, and I think it's disgusting.

I don't know where Michael Jackson, Farrah Fawcett and Ed McMahon will be spending eternity.

In heaven??? Or hell???

Wherever they are...I'm sure that they are crying out for you to get reconciled with Jesus.

If you don't KNOW that your eternity is secure in heaven then you can be certain that it's not!

Jesus said we can know that we are heaven bound.Not wish or hope, but literally know.

The Holy Spirit confirms and convinces us.

Where will YOU spend eternity?*

I shouldn't have to tell anyone this, but Michael Jackson, Farrah Fawcett and Ed McMahon all have families and others who loved them. Those people are hurting right now, and it is incredibly disrespectful and disgusting to pimp the recently deceased for Jesus.

Plus, can you imagine reading the above about your not-even-cold-yet loved one? Are they in heaven, are they in hell- who knows? If I believed in such things, I would be enraged and hurt to see someone speculating that my loved one might be burning in hell for all eternity.

Just another case of "Jesus makes me immune to normal rules of civility", I guess.


*click the link for a look at the posters psychotic unusual use of font sizes.

Hoping for Suffering

hate, christianity, hell, atheism, atheist, bible, god, jesus,
Recently I've been getting a lot of anonymous trolling in the form of "I hope you atheists enjoy hell!!!! hahahahaha".

First of all, I will publish anonymous comments, if you include your screen name in the comment. I'm not asking for a copy of your birth certificate here, people. Just make up a name. Open up a dictionary and combine the first two words you see. Is it really that hard?

Secondly, you're seriously hoping that other people suffer? Really? When did that become moral behavior? The fruits I shall know you by are laughter at the thought of another person in eternal torment?

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.

Which part of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control is wishing eternal torment on someone- and then laughing about it?

Do you frequently walk up to people who annoy you in real life and sincerely wish that their appendixes (appendices?) will explode, poisoning them? Do you wish cancer on your neighbors that always park in your spot? Did you laugh when the little girl down the street was hit by a car?

What kind of monster are you? And what about your gleeful hatefulness should I admire and desire to emulate?

Defining Lust

atheism, atheist, religion, religious, jesus, bible, christian, christianity, muslim, hell, judaism, jewish, orthodox, burqa, modesty, lust
Quasar, over at the SMRT board, has possibly explained a fundy (and I'm speaking of Christian, Jewish and Muslim fundys here) viewpoint that has long confused me- lust.

Fundys make a big deal about sexual attraction, and it's never made sense to me. (Growing up Catholic, you learn a lot about the evils of birth control, but nobody makes a big deal about clothing or lust in general.)

We all know about the burqa and the head scarf, and if you live where I live, you've seen how Orthodox Jewish women dress. Christian fundys aren't generally quite that extreme, but they do make a fuss about modesty.

Quasar's explanation:

Now that I've got you interested with the title... how broad is the definition of lust, and how does this apply to sexually repressed fundies?

For me there are three distinct levels, and I only define the third as 'lust.'

1. The first is simply in passing: I notice a girl, and may not even consiously think about her, but my mind recognises that she has attractive features and I could tell others that she was attractive if they asked.

2. The second is more like 'admiration.' This is simply a platonic admiration of the other persons aesthetics: consiously registering their beauty. An example might be when your eyes fix on someone as they go by. Happens to me a lot.

3. The third is what I call lust, and involves actual sexual attraction. This emotion is extremely rare, and takes a lot to evoke, in me at least.

Now, I'm beginning to think that fundies may have a much broader definition of lust. Consider those who force women to wear head-scarfs to prevent lust from being evoked.It seems to me that they consider even the first definition, simple recognition of attractiveness, to be lust. Something Ray once did (Hi Maragon!) and the general behaviour of fundy christians, leads me to believe that they consider the second definition as lust. Or is it possible that the sexual repression both groups enforce causes them to experience the third definition of lust far more frequently than myself? Or a combination of the two? Chime in! What do you think?

While I find it entirely possible that people who are repressed about sex might end up thinking about it even more (Pink Elephants! I dare you not to think of them!), I think it may well be true that simply noticing a member of the opposite sex, or recognizing their relative attractiveness is what qualifies as lust to fundys.

This is an extremely odd viewpoint because, as another SMRT member noted, one could achieve 1 or 2 with a dog, a horse, a painting or a piece of furniture. Simply acknowledging the beauty in a person is not lust.

To view acknowledging beauty as sin is just mindblowing to me. "God made the world a beautiful place- don't enjoy it or you'll burn forever!" has to be the most depressing theology I've ever heard of.

Now on to 3, real lust. I fail to see what exactly is wrong with lust. For one thing, lust is a desire to act, not an action. For another, we're biologically programmed to lust. Perpetuation of the species and all that. I know, I know, Jesus did say that desire and action are one and the same. Lusting is the same as fucking. Anger is the same as murder.

What a peculiar viewpoint. For one thing, who can control their thoughts? Just writing this is sending me into a really detailed fantasy involving [censored] and it is HOT! What were we . . . oh, yeah, controlling your thoughts. Not possible. I suspect that any religion that puts you in the position of thought sinning is really aiming at a particularly insidious form of control. "You can't control your thoughts, pervert? Better get some Jesus before your burn! Oh, what, Jesus isn't enough to stop you from thinking sinful things? Better start attending church and reading the bible and tithing- otherwise it's the outer darkness for you!"

Thoughts are normal. Noticing another person's beauty is normal. Appreciating another person's beauty is normal. Lustful thoughts are normal. (This fantasy I am having- not so much.) Homosexual thoughts in an otherwise hetero person? Also normal. Getting worked up about it? Not normal, not healthy and not necessary.

We may need a few more bus ads.

Right Over the Edge

hell, heaven, obama, evil, god, pride, stupid, pilgrims progress
Either Pearlysnot has been reading a lot of Pilgrim's Progress lately, or she's gone right over the edge. I'm voting against Pilgrim's Progress.

Hell Called Today. He Said He Wants Back In.

First of all, the picture she used is disturbingly muscley and well, naked. I'm the last person to complain about nudity, especially male nudity, but that picture is squicky.

Our government leaders, run amok of the will of the people, have taxed, bailed, and stimulated the Hell out of America. This would be a good thing right? We don't want hell in the US, do we? And is hell like hell as in a place bad people go, or is hell being used as another name for Satan? I'm not sure how a metaphorical place could be removed, or how it could use a telephone.

Hell called today. and in other news, shame just text messaged me. apparently, pearlysnot won't take its calls anymore. He said he wants back in. He’ll promise anything to be reinstated; anything, that is, but the removal of his earthly influence. but we got rid of hell with the taxing, bailing and stimulating. shouldn't we be doing more of it?

In the last few months, Hell’s presence has been drastically reduced to the ornate, echoing hallways, conference rooms, and judicial chambers of our state and country capitols. wait a minute, are those places not in the US? because the metaphorical place/supreme evil being was just kicked out of the US. so, is it/he in the US or not? i'm confused. Certain politicians and special interest groups, promoting personal agenda over representation of the public, yes, creating jobs and feeding people is not what's best for our society. it's a terrible idea. have welcomed Hell with open arms IS IT KICKED OUT OR IS IT HERE?!, lighting the fire and keeping the coals of Corruption ever glowing. sigh

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac caught up with the Present and in an exercise of misguided Democracy, the desperate people of this country mistook Ambition for Salvation, electing the former to the highest seat in the land. what? Hell applauded. from within the US, outside the US, or in my arms? Ambition was cool, calm, and collected. ambition is bad? since when? that's decidedly unamerican, my dear. socialist, even. perhaps even facist. Ambition promised the people much - at the very least a renewed America. Being ambiguous acquaintances by day and close confidants by night, Ambition and Hell flew under the radar and went to town doing what they do best, reveling in the chaos and havoc wreaked upon an unsuspecting and emotionally vulnerable people. a metaphorical place and an indefinite noun went clubbing? when will the madness end?

But the hardened citizens of America, descendants of Pilgrims and Pioneers, yes, those brave souls who civilized the Native Americans, um, yeah. Anyway, I'm not a descendant of a Pilgrim or a Pioneer. Lots of USians aren't. posterity of Trial and Tribulation is she just randomly throwing nouns at a board now?, cinched up their belts, brandished their tea bags BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA quite the reinterpretation of how the west was won, that., and said Enough! without a comma or quotes? Exercising true Democracy in a restorative attempt, America reared up in protest, the whole continent, or just the descendents of pilgrims and pioneers? standing united against Folly and Imprudence is every single indefinite noun going to show up at some point?, Ambition and Hell. Hell was properly exposed oh my! and driven back but i thought we already taxed, bailed and stimulated hell out?!, tenuously confined to his partner’s presidential palace. Obama lives in the White House, which is not a palace, and i'm fairly certain the White House is IN THE UNITED STATES. one last time: IS. HELL. GONE. OR. NOT.

While Hell is being steadily eviscerated from the fed-up hearts of the American laymen ouch, Ambition and his congressional minions yet retain a powerful, positional? influence over the slowly-awakening America.

Hell called today. He said he wants back in. oh, for the love of . . . is hell gone or not? But until his membership is reinstated in the hearts of the American citizenry, what? Hell is content to work his mischief through his companions, Ambition and Corruption. and folly and imprudence? trial and tribulation? pilgrims and pioneers? oh, that hurt just to type it.

When push comes to shove, that's a thought which faction will reign supreme? i can't tell. there's so many factions at this point, who could tell? Humility and Industry or Ambition and Corruption? please just stop. Which will you choose to be your Master? i'm going with Irony. And where is Heaven in all this? we haven't even established where hell is! Where are the heavenly hosts of Guardian Angels? and out of left field- comes pearlysnot!

They are mobilizing right alongside Humility and Industry, of course. headdesk Can you feel them? They care. HE This is either god, jesus or joseph smith. possibly bringham young. i can't tell. cares. But HE won’t help us if we forget and deny HIM. if good things happen, that's god. (or jesus or smith or young.) bad things are all our fault.

HE knows Ambition. HE knows Corruption. HE knows you. The question is, what is your Name?

Mine is Urgency. funny, i would have though Bombast. Possibly Supercilious. Maybe Vainglory.

~Pearl

Nothing Here to See

religion, religious, worship, bible, god, christian, christianity, hell, jesus, atheism, atheist, ray, comfort, lahaye, jenkins, robertson
The Slacktivist, of all people, solidified why I could never worship the god of most Christians. (This god is clearly not the Slacktivist's god, but he is a very popular god indeed.)

The Slacktivist recently wrote two posts on the Christian hell, here and here. You must- let me repeat that- must read them if you haven't already. The first post deals with Christianity's conflation of the bible, which only mentions hell three times in passing, and Dante's Inferno. The second post deals with the basic unethical, immoral, unfairness of hell as popularly imagined.

The Slacktivist disproves the popular notion of hell using Hitler. Yes, Hitler. It's really quite amazing.

There are plenty of unseemly or even reprehensible reasons why someone might choose to believe in an eternal Hell, and we needn't spend much time on those. But there are also some better, more reasonable and nobler reasons. Such as the Hitler question.
. . .

Whatever miserable end befalls a Hitler or an Amin or Stalin or Saddam Hussein in this world it still seems, somehow, inadequate. Those responsible for the suffering and death of millions can only suffer and die once themselves, and this seems disproportionate. It seems unfair. It is unfair.

For that unfairness, that injustice, to be addressed or redressed, it seems there needs to be some further accounting for such evils. Hell, or something like it, seems necessary then for the Hitlers of this world.

. . .

The eternal aspect of this idea of Hell is also troublesome. Part of the trouble here, as ever when we talk of "eternity," is that we tend to think of it in terms of "forever" or "a very long time" -- roughly the same mistake as thinking of "infinity" as meaning "a really big number." But it's also the case, as many have argued, that it seems unfair and unjust that temporal, finite wrongdoing would be consigned to an eternal, infinite punishment.

. . .

That last bit has bothered me since the first grade (my first grade teacher was a nun with an interest in hell that was positively unseemly for a Catholic). More than that though, this post set me on the path to a thought that was so basic, so true, so compelling that I actually stopped what I was doing and just stared, stunned by how far into the depths of my own psyche I had accidentally reached.

Even if it were proven to me, beyond any doubt, that the god of Ray Comfort and Pat Robertson and LaHaye and Jenkins were real, I could not* worship him.

To clarify, if the god that the Slacktivist worships were proven to me, beyond any doubt, I would gladly worship. God, as the Slacktivist portrays him, is kind and generous, a deity who wishes us to help the poor, comfort the suffering and give companionship to the lonely. I could get behind that. I do all those things without god, so a deity like that fits right in with my morality.

Ray Comfort's god does not. His is a god of fire and brimstone, a god of eternal, fiery punishment for the most minor of infractions, a god who will happily torment Ghandi forever for the terrible sin of not saying the magic words.

If this doesn't bother you, it really should. Even the suffering Hitler caused was finite. It will end, at some point. Infinite torment for finite crimes is entirely out of proportion. It would be like imprisoning someone for life for stealing a penny. It would be like that, times forever.

That's insane. That's psycopathy on a level no one could match.

I could not worship such a god.

Just to be clear, worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred and to feel an adoring reverence or regard for

I could not give "revent honor or homage" to Ray Comfort's god any more than I could "feel an adoring revernce or regard" for Hitler himself. I simply could not.

I could pretend. I could say the words, and attend a church and lie and lie and lie, but I could not worship such a god. A truly omniscient god would know this. Every gesture, every word would be a lie. My sin in lacking reverent homage would only be compounded by the sin of lying.

What loving god creates a system wherein a person capable of mercy and pity is the person most likely to suffer infinitely?

What kind of people not only throw themselves into worshipping such a god, but believe that, and only that, to be justice?

*"Could not" in the same way I could not fly or I could not breathe water.

Fun with Fundys

atheism, atheist, death, heaven, hell, religion, christian, christianity,
Remember my death ticker post? (It's okay if you don't, I won't cry for long.) I just got the bestest anonymous comment evah!

Since it was a short post, I'll reprint it here:

Seriously, this is awesome! Awesomely awesome!This is the first thing that comes up on the webpage (I have a discreet Google search. Feel free to use it.)

150,000 People Will Die Today The counter to the side to the right are rapidly rising numbers in BRIGHT RED is ticking off the number of people who have died since you opened this webpage. So far? 14.5. The vast majority of those people are entering Hell. Yes! You're all going to hell- unless you believe exactly what I do! I know the secret, and the rest of you will burn! Only I know the answer- follow me without thinking or suffer for all eternity! Christ commanded his followers to share the Gospel with those who are perishing so get thee to a nursing home, then, because as of today, I'm okay... who have you shared with today? 26.3

The counter comes from Living Waters, your evangelism resource- a subsidiary of Ray Comfort, professional Liar for Christ(tm). 47.1 I'm letting the counter run to see if it stops at 150,000.
63.4

So, 13 days later this is the anonymous* comment I get:

I ask simply not wanting an answer from you. But that you would look honestly at you answer the question for yourself. Do you fear death?

No, I don't fear death. First of all, there's nothing you can do about it. Everybody dies. Why get all obsessed about it? (I naturally tend toward Zen.) Secondly, I believe that when I die, nothing happens. The instant I die I will no longer be capable of thinking, feeling or anything else, so I won't know the difference.

I had my appendix removed when I was 17. On the way to the surgery, I was losing my mind I was so frightened. I kept trying to crawl off the gurney while crying and trying to convince anyone I saw that I didn't need surgery. Seven seconds after they gave me the anesthesia, I passed out. When I woke up it was all over. I went from going into surgery to waking up with it all over with. I felt really stupid about being that scared. (In my defense, at that point my temperature was 104.5.) (As a side note, my heart stopped 4 times during that surgery, once for 45 seconds, but that's an entirely different story.)

To me, that's what death seems like. Something everyone is so frightened of, but once it happens, it's done and there's nothing to be scared of any more.

This is the basis of the atheist credo: stop worrying about tomorrow and live today. It truly makes me sad to watch people so focused on an afterlife that isn't going to happen that they don't bother to live the life they do have. Life is beautiful. It is filled with beauty and wonder and happiness and love- but only for those with the courage to go find those things and grab them with both hands.

*When is a screen name not anonymous enough? Honestly, people, that's just silly-unless you think my parents named me "Personal Failure".

Lady Liberty is Made of Win

atheism, atheist, witness, witnessing, evangelical, evangelism, evangelist, religion, christian, fundamentalism, fundamentalist, fundy, bible, jesus, heaven, hell,

Lady Liberty winz the interwebs!

Atheist Humor

atheism, atheism, religion, hell, humor,

Does this need an explanation? (From Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal)

The God Train

subtitle: the trouble with metaphors.

It's surprising how often writers get into trouble with metaphors. In essence, a metaphor is a technique in writing where you describe one thing as being equal to a second thing in some essential way. I like the metaphor of bigotry being a double-edged sword: whenever you swing it, you damage yourself as much as your target. That is a metaphor that works. It describes exactly how I feel about bigotry, without implying anything unintended or unfortunate.

The metaphor of the following article, Crossing Paths with God by Dan Ecklund, is not so successful.

When a car tries to race a train to the crossing, and it ties for first place, it usually ends up as a loser. The odds the train will swerve to avoid the collision are zero, and the likelihood of the car winning the match up is slim. Most collisions usually leave the car and driver so mangled that the identity of both can’t be easily recognized. The power, speed, and weight to the train are taken out on a thin metal frame and glass. Millions are spent on warning lights and crossing arms, yet the warnings go unheeded on a daily basis as drivers try to shave a few seconds off their travel time.

I like this first paragraph. ". . . ties for first place" is understated, "The odds the train will swerve to avoid collision are zero . . ." is amusing and the rest is quite evokative. It's practially poetic, and it describes an event I've seen play out numerous times, though never ending with tragedy. I was hopeful that this article would be better than than any other I have seen on RaptureReady.

Alas, such was not to be.

In the lives in the life of blahblahblah, not the lives. this use of the plural implies that every person has multiple lives. for a hindu, this would be appropriate, not so much for a christian. of every person, we if you start with "in the lives of every person", you can't move to "we". either start with "in all of our lives" or end with "all of us". continue to try to beat the odds with God.

And that's where the metaphor falls apart. He just compared God, loving omnipotent, omniscient creator of all (hey, i don't believe that, but Mr. Ecklund does) with a train. He then compares meeting your maker with a train collision. I'm an atheist, and I find that metaphor unfortunate. Beyond the "impersonal and ultimately avoidable display of certain principles of physics" aspect to it, there is the implication that one could surviving "beating the odds with god". It is theoretically possible to survive a collision with a train. It's probably even happened. Could one possibly come out on top of a meeting with god. Really?

If you were to poll the average person living in America, you’d find the majority would list themselves as Christians. According to the US Census Bureau, in 2001 79.8% of USians self identified as christian. Numerous polls have ranked people who confess belief in God between 90 and 96 percent. Which polls? The US Census Bureau puts the number of atheists/agnostics at 15% in 2001. Admittedly, agnostics do believe in god, but I can't tell where he is getting that figure from. (Notice that I told you exactly where I got my figures from.) I also have to wonder if he is including Jews and Muslims in this statement. Yet despite the belief in a God, the population is divided in a moral standard that should accompany Him. More like completely fragmented. That 79.8% who self identify as christian, are divided into 18 different groups, not including the "other" percentage. People say things like “My god would never create Hell.” ”My god has told me He’s fine with my lifestyle.” “My god told me (insert sin here) is ok.” Who says these things? I looked at the tenents of every one of the 18 listed christian denominations and they all believe in hell and sin. In general, when people say "god told me", what comes next involves hatred or violence. One must concluded one of two things as truth, either one god has a personality disorder, or some of us have a different God. 18+ different christian denominations, plus judaism in its variations, islam in its variations, hinduism, buddhism, etc.? Yeah, well, duh!

Christians in Chaos BWA HA HA HA HA HA I don't know what it is about the word "chaos", but it comes with a villain laugh attached to it for me. Obviously, I can't discuss chaos BWA HA HA HA HA HA theory.

Statistics don't lie- but statisticans often do.

Even though most Christians will claim we serve the same God really, do they? i have no idea. i'm guessing this guy doesn't either., it becomes evident that we do not. is this some sort of polytheistic revelation? Mr. Ecklund is not a monotheist? (Oddly, neither christianity nor judaism require monotheism, which is the belief that there is only one god. Both religions only require that you don't worship any other gods, which is monolatrism. Hmmm) It’s shown by the design a person puts on their personal god of chose choice?, taken from the Christian God. ok, i have no idea what this sentence even means. Does he mean that all gods are only copies of the christian god? kinda sticky considering that Jesus was a jew. Barna the Barna Group is, according to their website, my partner for information, strategy, execution and transformation. Whatever that means. surveys support this view. Here’s a list of division within “confessing Christianity” the only reference to confessing christianity that i could find was in reference to a christian resistance organization in nazi germany. on key issues that are found within scripture.

One third of born again adults (33%) say that abortion is a morally acceptable behavior, compared with 45% of all adults, 4% of evangelicals, and 71% of atheists and agnostics. (2004) I'm a little surprised that so many "born again" adults feel that way, but the rest of the numbers don't surprise me.

Half of born again Christians (46%) agree that Satan is "not a living being but is a symbol of evil." (2007) Where does satan appear in the bible? Not in the old testament at all. In fact, most of what you think of as religious fact concerning satan is taken from "Paradise Lost" by John Milton. Are epic 17th Century British poems scripture?

46% of born again Christians deny Satan's existence see above, i guess.
26% of born again agree that "while he lived on earth, Jesus committed sins, like other people he was rude to his mother once, which in Leviticus is supposed to be punished with death.
36% of born again said they believe in moral absolutes
37% of born again believe that if a person is good enough they can earn a place in Heaven. (2007) only 37%? That explains a lot of behavior on the part of fundagelicals.

Focus on the last two of the 2007 polls first. 36% of born again believers say they believe in moral absolutes. That means for 64% of believers there are no moral grounds that can’t be adjusted. I found this very surprising until I thought about the problem with polls: the questions. (among other things) I cannot believe that 64% of any group believes that there are no, none, nada, zip moral absolutes. For example, unless you're polling NAMBLA, where would you find any group of people 64% of which think that "raping kids of bad" is in any way adjustable?

Let me put it another way. If you asked 100 random people "is killing someone bad?", I guarantee you that at least 95% of those people would say, "yes, killing people is bad." However, if you asked those same 100 people "could you think of a situation in which killing someone would be justified?", I guarantee you that at least 80% of them would say "well, yeah, if it were to save my life . . . "

See what I'm getting at? It's all in how you ask the question. I'd have to see the questions Barna asked, exactly as they were asked, to get a sense of what this means.

That in itself explains the division within Christianity. Not really. If want to, read about what caused Protestantism, the first break in christianity. It didn't have to do with biblical inerrancy. If God’s Law, written in stone, is not an absolute, then the person can decided what is morally acceptable to them. Does this guy not speak English natively? "then a person can decide" plus, if god's law is "written in stone" then it is necessarily absolute, that is the meaning of the phrase. If it is not absolute, then it is not written in stone. I would imagine Mr. Ecklund is referring to the ten commandments, and the various branches of christianity can't even agree what they are exactly. This is of key importance. If something is absolute truth, it must come from outside of mankind, as it’s obvious we change what’s right and wrong to fit our desires no, not obvious to me. you'll have to show you're work on this one. People don't change their minds on what is right and wrong to fit the situation. Well, normal people don't. What normal people do is excuse their own behavior based on "special circumstances. For example, cheating on my husband is wrong. I could decide that due to the circumstances in our relationship, however, that I am justified in doing so. I would still assert that cheating is wrong. (no, I don't cheat on my husband.). It is no different that saying we can decided if we can beat the train to the crossing, despite the arms being down and the lights are flashing. No, actually that's totally different. In every way. Saying that there are situations in which killing another human being is justified- war, self defense, defense of another-- is not the same as deciding that physics doesn't apply to me. May as well try to flap my arms and fly away. Which is in no way morally reprehensible.

Recently, some Texas Catholics went into an uproar. Two bishops wrote a letter on the churches standing on abortion. The bishops wrote that it was immoral to support the act, which had been the churches belief for the last 50 years. Upon some of the church members hearing the letter read during church, they left the service. Some of those who left that were interviewed on TV, and they demanded the churches be taxed for taking political sides. The former patrons had decided the issue of “life” was not a moral one, but a political choice, and the church itself had no right to tell them what to do. Actually, that is not what happened. He is referring to two separate occurrences. During the election, the Catholic Church announced that good catholics would vote for McCain because of Obama's stance on abortion. (Killing people during a war? Just fine!). After the election, the Catholic Church announced that anyone who voted for Obama must receive confession prior to receiving the eucharist again. That is seriously blurring the line between church and state, and Ratzinger (or whatever he calls himself these days) does not want to go there.

Moving on.