Skip to main content

Honestly

By Carl S ~

Perhaps most of you on ExChristian were attracted to the “opposite” writers, and found yourself, as when in love, enhancing your life. “They” weren't opposite after all; they spoke to the real you. You were tempted to go into forbidden territory. Personally, I like temptation, no lie. It's the people who are in denial who rant the loudest against it. Temptation tells you what your real inclinations are, and in itself does no harm! You found out when you were a child there's nothing more tempting than challenging “Don't.” The bible may be “the world's best selling book,” (though there's no way to fact-check that claim), but the largest market in the world has to be pornography, and I bet the religious are “faithful”consumers.

I'm for temptation, but I'm for self-control too. One major problem with Christianity is that it doesn't teach self-control outside of dogmatic constraints. As soon as most adults begin to suspect the dogmas are all b.s., they're going to abandon them and do their own thing, even if it means living a double life of going through the motions for the neighborhood. At core, religions teach it's okay to lie to yourself, while at the same time telling you you’re evil to the core, so avoid and resist temptation. But reality is compelling. There's an old saying, “Where there's a church, there's a tavern.” Who are they kidding?

The prostitute is always more honest than the prelate. And honest about the prelate. We can learn about faith healing from its debunkers; the practitioners know it's all crap. Apologists are lawyers defending the actions of a criminal, God. They blame the victims. “My client is not responsible – they brought it on themselves.” Apologists make a living filling a need by rationalizing crazy beliefs for people who like their deceit with cream and sugar. Big time “prophets and spokesmen for God” are the Ponzi schemers never brought to justice; their victims won't file suits. (What think you, ExPastor Dan?)

Religions are operated by people with power who keep their own and their sects lies and sins hidden behind curtains, multitudes of curtains, so they must continually keep moving and distracting; you can't allow anyone to look behind any one of them! They have to be constantly on the lookout because they know so well: open curtains mean open questions, and they certainly don't want to be questioned.

I bet the clergy, like so many given power, get their rocks off not only in pornography but in deceit. There are individuals who take pleasure in fooling people. It has to be an addiction, the pleasures of getting away with deceiving. And the power of feeling superior, and religion is the perfect system for these needs. Clergy enjoy exemptions to the rules everyone else has to live by, since they’re “ordained by God.” We might be tempted to imagine ourselves in a clergyman's position: sitting in your office watching porno (so that you can preach against it, of course), you take your sermons off the internet, modify them, and pass them off as original and inspired. You get calls from those Abe Lincoln said are “some of the people you can fool all of the time.” But you don't have to work at making an honest living. (Unless by work you mean having to be a dependable entertainer.) And it's all tax-free!

We're all fascinated by the serial killer, embezzler, neo-Nazi, child molester, the corrupted rich and powerful, etc. They evaded being caught because they excelled at deceiving the majority and those closest to them. Maybe we the deceived are stunned to find there’s a recognition of human nature so “different” yet familiar. There's a perplexity mixed with horror when people discover urges in others they don't want to see in themselves. (On one day of broadcasts, survivors described different perpetrators, one as “a monster,” with two others saying, “the devil takes many forms.”) Others refer to Jekyll/Hyde. Those persons are humans. The “banality of evil” doesn't fit into the average mind-set. There's no Absolute to evil or good, and every goddamn thing has built-in limitations, including “God.” And it doesn't say much for the everlastingness of Hell when you realize the Inquisition, burning of women as witches, holy wars, and Crusades, had to end when death and destruction became tedious.

It's amazing how easily people are deceived. Time and time again, their perplexity is ablaze as they try to grasp how the person they thought they knew very well turned out to be acting without remorse or regret. That person is said to “lack a conscience,” but is still a human being, and even may not be responsible for his or her acts. These humans are “different.” So let's set aside “devil in human form” or “diabolical possession,” and question: What if there's something in their brains driving them, and their 'normal' feels as perfectly normal to them as it does to a clever animal acting in the wild? And at the same time, the same perplexed good people themselves, but deceived, know that a god who does nothing to stop or hinder the evil right in front of their eyes, who they would recognize to be, in every court, just as guilty as a perpetrator, is a truly loving god they have a personal relationship with.

One slick trick is telling their followers there's an empty place in one's being only a god can fill.Clergy have plenty of time on their hands to make up shit. One slick trick is telling their followers there's an empty place in one's being only a god can fill. I find it insulting to imply an unbeliever is an incomplete person. So, with gene editing, would doctors be able to implant a faith-gene in that empty part of someone's brain? That's hilarious. So maybe there's a primitive superstition gene in a vestigial part of many overly- religious brains that, like a burst appendix, needs to be removed? If there is a superstition-gene, it's certainly nothing to brag about, or to justify denigrating others for “lacking.”

In becoming oneself, you might notice your religion always claimed it's “spiritual,” and raised the “spiritual” far above human pleasures. It protested too much. Now, honestly. Religion has always been obsessed with sex and with controlling sex. But the temptation to the contrary is a part of being human, and so we asked, “What's wrong with something that's so good in so many ways?” It's like ”Who needs religion?” Others are perfectly happy and moral while “lacking” faith.

Maybe it wasn't until people started thinking with their minds about sex, and since the 1920's, that Christian-imposed sexual repression was challenged by sexual expression, and this has continued on to more open expressions of affection. Is sexual freedom equal to rational thinking as an explanation for the waning of religions throughout the western world? And sugar, for how could European minds blossom without sugar from the New World in the Age of Enlightenment?

Alexander Woollcott said, “Everything I want is either illegal, immoral, or fattening.” Now there's an observation for the ages. What was once shocking is conventional wisdom. Maybe someday dumping “evil person” will be.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

ACTS OF GOD

By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not

On Living Virtuously

By Webmdave ~  A s a Christian, living virtuously meant living in a manner that pleased God. Pleasing god (or living virtuously) was explained as: Praying for forgiveness for sins  Accepting Christ as Savior  Frequently reading the Bible  Memorizing Bible verses Being baptized (subject to church rules)  Attending church services  Partaking of the Lord’s Supper  Tithing  Resisting temptations to lie, steal, smoke, drink, party, have lustful thoughts, have sex (outside of marriage) masturbate, etc.  Boldly sharing the Gospel of Salvation with unbelievers The list of virtuous values and expectations grew over time. Once the initial foundational values were safely under the belt, “more virtues'' were introduced. Newer introductions included (among others) harsh condemnation of “worldly” music, homosexuality and abortion Eventually the list of values grew ponderous, and these ideals were not just personal for us Christians. These virtues were used to condemn and disrespect fro