Tis the Season to be Jolly

A lot of people the world over celebrate Christmas on December 25th every year. Approximately 400 million humans take part in the festivities, making it one of the largest social, commercial and economic events of the year. It all generally begins a day earlier, however, on the 24th with Christmas Eve and continues the following morning with traditional gift opening rituals.

One of the things that makes Christmas special is its power of bringing people, family in particular, together again. Cousins, aunts, grandfathers and even the creepy uncle we all seem to have collectively make the effort to reunite during this time and rekindle the wonder that is extended family.

Christmas is derived from the old English word “Cristes maesse”, which literally translates as Christ's Mass. So, on this day, Christians the world over celebrate the birth of their God, Jesus Christ. However, like most rituals and traditions in Christianity, this is only his symbolic birthday. No one actually knows what day he is said to have entered the Earth.

With that lack of information, early church fathers did what they always have; filled in the blanks as they saw fit. In the early parts of the Fourth century, they gathered and chose the 25th day of December. They fixed the day around the old Roman Saturnalia festival (17 - 21 December), a traditional pagan festivity.

From 354 A.D, nearly all Christians accepted the day chosen for them and have honored the birth of Christ accordingly every since. The only sects to diverge from this norm are the Armenian ones who celebrate this day on January 6th.

While this fact is not really much to fret over, it is further sign of how much of what is believed today has been determined by mere humans. This troubling pattern plagues Christianity; when you don't have the answer, just make up something that sounds right and move on.

From the trinity, a word that cannot be found in scripture, to the very books that are in the Bible; this phenomenon is very prevalent. Being the pattern-seeking creatures that we are, humans finished off the things Jesus didn't tell us but really 'wanted to.'

It saddens me that we could not be satisfied with merely doing what was commanded of us and being Christ-like, living a life of love, forgiveness and the golden rule, but had to go one step further and become an army of Christians. The need for institutionalization may forever be the plight of humanity.

College Application Essay

Hey everyone! This is an essay I submitted to a Christian college where I was asked to explain my interest in the religious emphasis at the school. Enjoy!

The first time I held a Bible in my hand was just over a year ago. I opened it up, not knowing quite what to expect, and found myself immersed in the book of Proverbs. Feeling the rough pages of the aged book on my fingers, I flicked through its contents. The first verse I found was: “Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend” (Proverbs 27: 17). Even thought I had heard it said that much of the Bible is written metaphorically and in parables, I had no idea what it meant or what context to digest it in.

With the hopes of better understanding the verse, I decided to get together with a group of my Christian friends later that week. As we were socializing, the topic shifted toward religion and the Bible. I soon began questioning them about their individual beliefs and how they had come to them. Then, a close friend of mine asked me what had piqued my curiosity. In answering her query, I informed everyone that I had recently read the Bible but had trouble wrestling with the many words and hidden meanings. I subsequently brought up the verse in Proverbs.

My friends chuckled among themselves. Eventually, they said that the verse was discussing the exact thing we were currently doing; talking about God, giving our different opinions on his nature and discussing the meaning of life. They went on to explain that it tells us we can gain wisdom, a word I had noticed repeated a great deal in Proverbs, from communicating with friends and companions.

From that moment on, something drove me to read more of this book and about this book. The librarian, also another Christian at my school, was very helpful the vast number of times I sought out books about God and religion. The year went on and I attended my first church gathering on a freezing cold December morning in Peja, Kosovo. The sermon was directed, in Albanian, by the father of a missionary friend that attended my school. I listened intently as he discussed a character called Paul from another book in the Bible called Acts. I went home and re-read the verses he cited in English, hoping to get a better understanding of the message within them.

My life from that point on has not changed much. If anything, the fervor I have for understanding God and religion has only been amplified. Mounting to a burning passion, it has also driven me to write a blog about my understanding of various religious and biblical concepts. I hope it will one day be the online version of the first discussions about God I had with my friends.

I do not know if the two are related, but in the same time my interest in psychology and counseling also grew. To my pleasant surprise, I found many books and an abundance of online sources that discussed the two themes interchangeably. I kept reading and, most importantly, kept discussing and sharing my opinions with whoever had the time and patience to listen to me.

That is probably the one thing that has made ****** University my number one choice for where I wish to spend the next four years of my life. The first sentence in the online page of the Psychology department at ****** says that it “integrates comprehensive study of the human mind with the Christian faith.” I was, and still am, immediately sold to the idea. I had finally found the place where my two passions could be intertwined. My mind raced to all the people I would meet; people like me yet at different places in their own spiritual journeys.

Everything I know today about Jesus and the Bible has come from my companions and a community that dedicates their lives to living a life like Christ. Despite my interest in learning about Christianity, I am very aware that there is so much I do not know. I feel that the strong religious emphasis that ****** provides can help answer some of the many questions I have. Immersing myself in a community devoted to Christ and his impact on humanity would greatly help me in my own journey through life while allowing me to contribute a slightly different perspective on the never ending discussion about God and how we, as mere humans, can inch closer to him.

The Beauty of Science

I remember growing up and feeling bad for the people that tried to be perfect all the time. They would set immeasurable standards for themselves and, sub consciously, for others that happened to be around them. Needless to say, such demanding a criterion was never met. Whenever failure presented itself to these people, they would scold themselves for not being perfect. Their entire lives would be put on hold as they fell into pits of depression for not being the right dress size or not getting an A on every single test they took. Such individuals were quite the sights for sore eyes.

During my childhood, I was bombarded with the lovely concept that mistakes happen and that they are truly unavoidable (the analogy of death and taxes comes to mind). What really matters, my teachers and parents would incessantly remind me, is that you learn from your mistakes so as to not fall victim to them again.

Science is blessed in possessing such an ideology. Religion, however, is not.

In all the times I've come into contact with a form of science I've been intrigued and mesmerized at the wonders of the things that surround me. I could describe such experiences as enlightening, humbling and even jaw-droppingly awe-inspiring. But, I would have never attributed the word "beauty" as an adjective to science. It never really came to my mind and if it had, I would have most likely shrugged it off without too much attention.

But, this is where the true beauty of science lies. It is allowed to be wrong. I could even go as far as saying that at times it is even required to be wrong, leading us one step closer to what is inevitably right and true. There have been so many wonderful and imaginative theories that have come our way because of science. Most have been proven, by science, to be untrue. What I personally find amazing is that the most wonderful and the most imaginative and the most elaborate theories have been the ones that have withstood the rigor of proof and evidence on the road to being truthful.

Take our solar system, for example. Two thousand years ago, humans would have been astoundingly baffled by the "theory" that our planet is one of a group that circles this giant ball of gas that doesn't seem so giant or "gassy" in the sky. They would have surely laughed at this elaborate idea and deemed it to be the work dreams and imaginative thinking. Many theories explaining our Earth and its relation to the Sun and the Moon and the other planets have been suggested. They have all been slowly proven to be untrue until, with the furthering of science, we can be certain that what we believe to be correct today truly is. The undeniable, unfalsifiable and incomparable beauty of science at its best; always asking, always probing and always scrutinizing.

Then, on the other end of the spectrum, we have religion. Each, or at least most, comes with some sort of book that explains everything and abundantly supplies its adherers with all the knowledge of the world, heaven, hell and all the in-betweens. I honestly don't see why we can't title such holy books as "ultimate how-to's on...everything!"

Most of them, unfortunately, were written a long time before science could even have a say in the matter. And with the development of science, most of the stories told in such books have gone from being considered the "one and only ultimate truth" to highly suspect and, at times, downright absurd and clearly untrue. But religion, of course, cannot go back and instruct Moses to change the whole "six day theory" because the Earth most certainly is not merely 6,000 years old. Nay, they cannot travel back in time and tell the Middle Eastern men who wrote the Old Testament that dinosaurs existed and that they might want to include them when passing off their works as the "words of god."

Religion, with all the lovely amounts of dogma that come along with it, is forced to reconcile scientific truth with their beliefs if they want to retain them. They aren't blessed with the notion that everyone makes mistakes and that they can be fixed and altered. These books and the believers peddling them are compelled to come up with fickle theories and absurd claims to explain the old age of our Earth, continental drift, the "theory" of evolution and so many more scientifically proven truths. My personal favorite of these irrational theories that attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable is the notion that dinosaurs did exist and lived happily with humans in same 6,000 year time span that the Earth has supposedly been around for (one cannot help but think of the Flintstones here)!

It is the job of science to question and scrutinize itself, constantly looking for possible errors and mistakes that may have gone untraced. Scientists the world over disagree on many things (such an idea may come as a wonderful thing to the apologist) and probe each other’s works. And when they are wrong, far from falling into depression like the perfectionists I grew up with, they get back up to the drawing board and start over again in seeking for the next, more elaborate theory that is surely to be the correct one. Unmistakably, this is the beauty of science at its most beautiful.

Sex and Survival

Corporations and business are nothing more than profit-seeking, money-making enterprises with a lust for green. The Nestle group is no different. Whatever decisions are pondered by the fat cats on the top floor are first pumped through many risk/reward programs. Recently, they have, together with their risk analyzing machines, decided that marketing powdered milk to famished pregnant women in Africa would be a wise business venture.

They first traveled to these countries offering free samples of the product to these women. So-called “scientists” informed the uneducated mothers-to-be that it would be a wise alternative for their babies to drink the powdered milk as it contained many nourishing entities that could be found naturally in the famished bodies they possessed. Naturally, they accepted without hesitation. What they weren't told was that they would eventually have to buy the product. There's no such thing as a free lunch, right!?

Of course, the women could not spend the little money they had in such a lavish way when it had to be used for food, water and/or medicine. Eventually, after becoming dependent on the free sample, their bodies gave out and no longer produced the natural milk, thereby providing quite the predicament for these women: buy the Nestle product or watch your babies slowly perish.

This was a story we analyzed in my Senior English class a few weeks ago. After reading and discussing this appalling report, our teacher posed a seemingly simple question for her students: what two things motivate people do the things they do?

Being somewhat aware of Freud and his theory, I answered that sex and survival are the two main contributing factors to our decisions. Being in high school, this statement was obviously met with a roar of laughter. I'm never one to turn down an opportunity to entertain my peers, but I was very serious with my hypothesis. The more I thought about it, in my admittedly angered state, the more it made sense to me.

How dare we judge Nestle for their actions!? They're a business. It's their job to think of ways to make more and more money. What they did was actually, however sadistic and cruel, quite a marvelous sales tactic. What better way to push your product than making your audience practically addicted to it. Ingenious! They were merely acting upon the instinct of survival. We all do it. We go to school, to go to college, to get a degree, to get a job and make money so we'll stay alive. Survival; and not too different from the kind we see in the animal kingdom.

Then there's sex. Have you ever wondered why we spend such elongated periods of time in front of a mirror? Sex is certainly the culprit. We get our hair done and buy clothes that accentuate our figures to attract the opposite gender in the hopes that we will stand out among other "competitors.” Hours are thrown away at bars as we woefully socialize with other humans hoping to make them want to mate with us. Like I stated before, the more and more I considered our society, the more the premise made sense to me.

Later that day, after the effects of the angering article had finally worn off, I remembered having once seen a man feeding a homeless person. At the time I didn't dedicate too much thought to the act. But this time around, it bothered me.

It just didn't...fit. He may have had an abundance of money, but just throwing it away to the "scrubs of civilization" didn't improve his chances of survival at all. In fact, that act only lessened his chances of surviving in today's world. And it certainly did nothing to help him get laid. Sure, many women would have considered him to be giving and generous and loving (all desirable traits in a mate), but no females were within sight. The simple act of taking money out of one's pocket to feed another man contradicted the entire theory.

As much as it pains me to say this most terrible of clichés, I think I "saw God" in that man. People have always sought him out; indeed, they will be forever searching for the divine. They will snoop around for Jesus at church. Other's will marvel at a Mosque when looking for Allah or sit in a synagogue seeking the wisdom of Yahweh. What these people do not seem to have realized is that they need not stare up into the heavens to find God. They aren't required to read words from pages within one of the many "holy" books that have unfortunately found their way into our hearts, minds and souls.

All they have to do is look within themselves and decide whether or not they have “found him.”

Pascal's Wager

It is mutually accepted by skeptics and believers alike that science and religion are two separate entities which cannot be intertwined. A scientist will tell you that his field of study is one that deals with quantifiable and observable things such as speed or weight. Likewise, a religious person will claim that their God is infinite and superior to any form of scientific testing. This is a rare consensus by two polarizing fields that we must all relish. What I find ironic is that a religious person will play the "infinite card" whenever science provides something contradictory to their ideology but, when logic and reason even hint at some truthfulness in their text or beliefs they jump with enthusiasm in saying that even science is on their side. But, I digress.

Blaise Pascal, a French philosopher and mathematician, made an attempt to reconcile the two concepts in the mid 1600s. His theory has many intricate details to marvel over but, in a nutshell, it states: "even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a person should wager as though God exists, because living life accordingly has everything to gain, and nothing to lose." As a Christian apologist, Pascal had the Bible's claims in mind when formulating this claim, but it is widely regarded that this "logic" can be used when contemplating any of the vast number of deities in existence.

One is forced to tip their hat off to the Frenchman. He went a step beyond the usual logic that the Bible (or any other text "considered" holy) is the word of God and that's all the proof anyone could ever need. I will even take it a step further and actually agree with him! I mean, it does indeed make sense. Not being a Christian results in burning in hell forever and having to look up at the all the smiling people who threw away any logic and reason to get there. But, actually being a Christian has no implications whatsoever. How many atheists or agnostics have you seen going around to churches claiming that all who submit to this attack of intellectuality will be in immeasurable trouble someday? None.

With that said, I do have a few queries with the reasoning needed to uphold such an assertion. The first is that it is absurd to actually believe that not being a Christian will result in eternal damnation. The only source that states this is an outdated, Bronze Age text that we don't have original copies of or that has ever proven itself credible.

Then, we are forced to wrestle with the issue that an omniscient being would have to resort to fear and coercion to win over the people he created himself. Sure, we have free will. I get that. But doesn’t the bearded guy in the sky have any other ways to advertise this wonderful place called paradise? The only way he seems to be able to make it worth our belief and sacrifice of logic and intelligence is by telling us how bad the other place is. We don’t often contemplate it, but how many people do you think would subscribe to the absurdities of religion if it wasn't for fear of punishment? Would we have this many Christians if they didn't wrongly believe they had everything to lose?

The final problem one finds in the theory is that the other side hasn't resorted to threats. Like I said before, non-believers don't claim that everyone else is doomed simply because they didn’t believe an obscure and obsolete text or didn't ever see it. We are forced to ask ourselves why this is the case. I strongly believe that time of conception has a lot to do with it. Religion was born in a time where human minds were vastly primitive in comparison to today's standards. The writers (middle-eastern men, not God) of the Bible didn't have the advantage of scientific testing and proof or magic to sell their theories. They were forced to resort to scaring the herds of people they governed with their assertions of heaven and hell.

With that said, there are other holes in the ideology. If believing in God makes more sense than not believing in him, then which God exactly do we forfeit our reasoning to!? There are so many! And, they are all equally as gruesome with their threats of unbelief. It's truly a conundrum. I think it's very fair to believe that any unbiased spiritualist seeking the empty hope and comfort that only religion can provide will be utterly lost and confused with his choice. He will be forced, like so many are, to pick the one that suites his way of life and, thereby, creates a god that is in accordance with his criteria. Clearly, the epidemic of creating God in our own image is ever more apparent. Of course, every religious person will argue that they possess the eternal truth and have it right but, they are sadly faced with the burden of proof. And, seeing as they claim that science has no place in religion, they're stuck.

Pascal's Wager is indeed an interesting topic to discuss and contemplate. However, I personally believe that it doesn't serve as a solution to anything. Even if we do somehow forfeit more logic (by logical means, nonetheless!) in believing in one god, how much good will that do? I refer my readers to the post "Jump then Fall", which discusses the epidemic of lukewarm faith and how any god would be unsatisfied with it. It's fair to assume that believing because it makes sense would most definitely be lukewarm faith. We are left with the option of assessing all religions and ideologies about God with a clear mind and, most importantly, without predetermining what result we will have at the end, like Pascal's Wager demands. We will undoubtedly arrive to an array of different conclusions; it's what makes us human. All I wish to one day accomplish is that whatever conclusions we do arrive to, they will not be the result of coercion, fear, need for comfort or indoctrination. You’ll be truly surprised at how similar our conclusions will be.

A Fight Worth Fighting

The last five weeks of my life have been spent attempting to acclimatize myself with foreign surroundings. For all those foolish enough to believe that the world doesn’t revolve around me and therefore have not kept in touch, I moved to the state of Utah to finish my high school career. The change has been drastic, to say the least. Many hours have been spent fretting over passports, visas and applications. Many more hours have been spent engaging my mind with homework assignments that I forgot existed after a wonderful summer of idleness. Yet more hours have found themselves wasted away in some arbitrary basketball court or weightlifting gym.

Time has been a luxury that has evaded me constantly and without mercy. My blog has unfortunately become the unfair recipient of neglect. While it has indeed been tough to keep up with such an endeavor that requires a certain passion which my chaotic schedule does not allow, this is merely an excuse. It’s the easy way out of a bigger problem that my conscience does not wish to address. The bigger problem is that my fervor for this cause that my heart knows is worth the exhaustion has waned in the face of other, far less important, areas of life that I am regrettably forced to engage in.

I have found myself lethargic when contemplating the matters of God after a full day of deliberating far more important things such as push ups, compound sentences, and what I should have for lunch. This has contributed to my lack of contribution in the “fight” for intellectual freedom against religious dogma.

Every time a friend or loved one presents me with anything that even vaguely hints toward a religious topic, I go off on an hour-long rant. The monologue my unfortunate friend has found himself immersed in is merely the product of weeks of neglect to a topic my heart longs to scream about for days on end. Overcompensation is how the medical world would diagnose it. These rants aren’t even well articulated or thought through. They are fueled by the excess passion which hasn’t been directed where it should.

I won’t go into too much detail when describing what particular event sparked the flame in my heart that I feared had gone out. However, this I will say: it has come from a place that is responsible for so many other sparks of fascination, love, discovery, and companionship that I thought were exclusive to those who actually deserved such blessings.

All it took was the introduction to a very well written book to remind me of my purpose. It gave my very soul reason to persist in something far bigger than myself. Reading through the initial words I was reminded that success is a journey and not a destination. In this journey we are all faced with the road bumps that adversity throws at us. But, it is how we deal with these set-backs that determines our character and purpose in life. The book’s preface reminded me that what I was doing, however small in the grand scheme of things, was indeed worth engaging in.

The world and its inhabitants would be far better off without the absurdities and evils of religion. In the past month or so I convinced myself that the problem would fix itself and that it really wasn’t that big of a deal. While I am still very confident in the human race and have faith that one day we will shed this most unnecessary of creations, I also realize that I must be the change I want to see in the world. In being that, I must promote it. All it took was for the sunshine in my life to unknowingly reignite the burning flame in my soul.

Indoctrination: The Fear

Being a good, law abiding citizen I have never been to prison. I don't think I'd ever like to go either. It seems like a dismal place that doesn't just take away one's freedom, but crushes their very soul literally obliterating all hopes and dreams. One word comes to mind when picturing the cold grey walls in a prison cell: institutionalized. And, when that eerie word creeps into my mind, a very moving film follows in my trail of thought. Shaw shank Redemption tells the story of a bank accountant falsely convicted of murdering his wife. It describes his time in prison, and of course, his heroic yet very rebel act in escaping from incarceration while taking the law into his own hands. It's a great movie in number of even greater ways. However, it isn't necessarily the protagonist that comes to mind when I recall the film. It's the librarian in the prison named Brooks Hatlen. The "old man" had been a member of the prison population for over 42 years when his parole finally came up and he was "set free". He bids farewell to the last group of friends he made during his strenuous stay there and heads out into world to find a job bagging groceries. Shortly after, Brooks hangs himself. On the surface it is the most confusing act one can take about after being granted their freedom back. However, if you dig a little deeper you can see that, after such a long time of confinement one develops a certain feeling of appreciation for their surroundings and grows comforted by the day to day schedule they are engrossed in. Sometimes it really is hard to change something when it literally becomes your life and everything about it.

Call me crazy, but there just might something in this admittedly extreme comparison between the dynamics of religion and prison life. Anyone will tell you that the way children are raised will greatly influence who they will become, what they will do and even how they will do it. This is one of the main facets of religion that I tend to strongly dislike; the indoctrination of young minds. I could even go as far as to say it's a form of brainwashing. I won’t slam on Christianity like I am usually inclined to do because every religion is guilty of this "sin". When you go about telling a child what to believe, you steal any and all forms of logic and objective reasoning from them. It goes without saying, but those are two key tools needed to get by in today's world.

I remember a few weeks ago watching the documentary series "30 days" by Morgan Spurlock. On that particular episode a women with atheistic convictions was sent to live with a Christian family in the hopes of breaking some barriers that exist in today's society by forcing the two groups to learn about one another. I won’t go into the details of the episode (although I strongly urge anyone interested in watching the episode) as only the beginning of it concerns this post. Before the women left her family to join her Christian hosts, the show filmed her having one last dinner with her family and also documented the last dinner the host family was having. Obviously, the Christian family said grace and played up to the camera while talking about Jesus and all that good stuff with their children. This didn't astound me as am cognizant of the indoctrination that occurs within religion. What amazed me was the so called "free thinking" atheist family was discussing the fact that there is no God to their 3 year old toddler! This blew me away in ways mere words will fail to describe. It sickened me. No child should have their parents' convictions forced down their throats at an age they cannot possibly comprehend such things as a God and the complexities of religion. A kid should be busy playing with Legos and being mischievous, not learning that there is no god or that if you don’t ascribe to calling him a particular name you will not be saved. There is something fundamentally wrong with this.

Best selling atheist author Richard Dawkins made a great point in his book "The God Delusion" when highlighting this phenomenon. He discussed the idea of labeling children with such terms as "Christian child" or "Muslim child". To me, it seems terribly mistaken to figuratively give each and every kid on Earth a name tag with their name, favorite color, whether they like Barney and, not neglecting the all important one, which god they supposedly adhere to! Think about it this way; minors, that is any person under the age of 18, aren't allowed to vote for the obvious reason that their minds aren't matured enough to comprehend such important matters as healthcare, taxes and going to war. But, what about most important issue of all: God! How can a minor be possibly able to decided what they believe about god if they can't decide whether Obama's healthcare reform was a good idea or not!? This troubles me greatly because I think there is strong evidence to indicate that it has harmed society greatly.

When someone mentions the word "hell", the first things that usually come to mind are a butt naked man with red skin and a goatee wielding a pitchfork surrounded by molten lava, fire and his demons, who all probably resemble him somewhat. To me, it's comical. For most people it is something obviously fashioned together by popular culture, such as television and the general media, and a couple religious verses here and there. But to children, it is the darkest of dark where the worst people of all go because they didn't listen to Jesus or Allah. I can't imagine what my current perception would be had I been coerced into contemplating the depths of hell an early age. The sad fact is that too many children today are forced to deal with that and comprehend that vile place created ever so beautifully by the master “story tellers” of religion. I believe it is terribly wrong and even "evil" to some extent to scare a child, willingly or otherwise, into a certain realm of belief. Apart from prematurely stealing the innocence I believe we should cherish and nurture for as long as society will allow, it distorts a person's reasoning in later life when they are forced to deal with the finer aspects of god and religion. Literally scaring a person into believing something will make them defend that particular conviction not because it necessarily makes sense to the logic God himself provided us, and most likely wants us to use, but because it is the one thing they have been "suffocated" by from as early as the time mommy told them about Satan and what he does to the "bad little boys and girls".

I remember hearing on a television documentary series that religion was, in all literal senses, the "enemy of logic and rationality". I also distinctly recall thinking that was a very bold and rather extreme statement for one to propose. Then I began debating some of the issues that seemed to stick out for me about religion in hopes of finding some sort of answer or explanation. Needless to say, for most of these issues, there was none. All I encountered was a bombardment of different interpretations by different denominations and, my personal favorite, the argument of context. I was astounded to find that so many people had to resort to such measures to defend what they believed. Surly, I pondered; there must be something more concrete and factual than this? There wasn't, or has not been yet. This was when I finally understood what that apparently extreme statement was trying to convey; once you indoctrinate a person into one, fixed set of beliefs, they won’t ever defend what they intuitively grasp by nature, but rather what they have been "trained" to adhere to. For example, a Muslim or a Christian will openly claim that they are prepared to defend anything in the Koran or Bible, even if they have not heard what it is yet, just because it is in their holy book. Normal reasoning and common sense must bow down before that particular person's "word of god". This goes back to the point I have tried to bring fourth in the blog as often as possible: in a world where everyone knows they possess the ultimate truth and all other possibilities are utterly mistaken, we will arrive at every possible outcome except "truth", all the while parading our arrogance to the world no matter how powerful the contradictory evidence may be.

Now, I would be foolish to claim that every religious person is this way. It's a matter of fact that there do exist, however small in number, a certain amount of open minded people who adhere to some sort of religion or other but do not make any claim to ultimate truth and inerrancy in their textual doctrine, but simply believe. This, I have no problem with. This is a display of grace and willingness to cooperate with other human beings and scientific evidence in arriving as close to "truth" as the big Guy in the sky will allow. I have no problem with calling God "Jesus" or "Allah" or "Buddha", but when one goes as far as invalidating everyone else's beliefs and claiming they know it all, that is when the world is faced with a problem. I don't see anything wrong with the idea that all the religions in the world are attempting to describe the same God, our creator. After all, don't they all claim he is "indescribable"!?

If all religions are as confidant in their truthfulness as they would proclaim, then why can't we spare the children of Earth the pain of indoctrination? I mean, if a religious family really does believe they have the ultimate truth, why not let their new born find it on their own? This is where the problem lies. All these people of faith seem to have everything but that. They don’t trust that a normal, rational and logical adult will arrive to the conclusions they have without "a little helping hand". Now, I’m sure many believers will cite "the great number of people who have converted to their way of thinking in adult life". To this I refer them to the equally great number that has converted away. All that proves is the message I brought forth in an earlier blog which said that we all need a father figure or protector in our lives and are willing to believe any number of theories or absurdities to gain that comfort. Indoctrination, as I have come to discover from talking and debating with religious people, is a tool used by religion to "boost membership" and keep everyone believing that faith has to be blind.

Jump then Fall

It was the third time in one month. After two very public and callous break ups, Steven had gone for lucky number three. Her tears flowed across her face as she stood there like a ghost in utter disbelief. She had made the same mistake every other poor girl looking for love had made when crossing paths with my buddy Steve. He didn't know how to handle the bawling girl that stood before him heartbroken (one would think with so much practice that a certain skill level would be developed in such situations, but no) so he gave her one last hug and walked away merrily towards the school gate. By now, word had spread of Steven's promiscuity and capricious nature but, to my never ceasing amazement, the girl's still ran to him and quivered with awe. He really was that good; smooth talking, confident and sexy. But what no one else saw in my buddy was his own shattered heart. He wasn't evil in his constant replacement of female companions but simply scared. Steve always said he'd never give himself to a woman just to be screwed over and toyed with. I guess it was never an option for him to be on the receiving end of the "It's not you, it's me" speech. I honestly can't remember if I tried to give him advice on this but sincerely hope that he has changed. Everyone seems to want to fall in love, but no one wants to jump. Knowing God, to me, is an awful lot like falling in love. You're either all in, willing to lose it all, or you're like my buddy Steven; dwelling in limbo never getting to know whether the risk was worth the reward.

The Bible, ever ready to tend to all situations with an abundance of wisdom and advice, seems to have addressed this same concept. Granted, it doesn't mention anything about teenage love and raging hormones, but Jesus portrays this idea very well. Revelation 3: 15-16 says, "I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other. So, because you are lukewarm-neither hot nor cold- I am about to spit you out of my mouth." Now, what would a good Bible verse be without an equally beautiful and artistically voiced threat; such as the one of spitting the fence-sitters out of Jesus' mouth? But, I digress. This passage, to me, is a very powerful one. It commands us, and rightfully so in my opinion, to be polarized about our faith and relationship with God. The "hot" being the Bible abiding Christians who do all that is instructed of them and the "cold" being the heathens. What I find pleasant is that Jesus seems to frown upon the Christians dwelling on the fence with their faith more than he does me, an ice cold critic. There might be hope yet! This verse is very important in that it clearly highlights, directly quoting Jesus Christ himself, that people who compromise but an inch of their faith are, figuratively speaking, doomed. Jesus asked us all to jump, with the reward not being teenage love, but eternity in heaven. But, I sometimes wonder how many Christians today are doing what is demanded of them by their deity?

From my observations today, there aren't many Christians who are as “hot” as they should be. What's ironic is that the ones that are abiding by the doctrine that they hope will send them to heaven, are viewed as extremists and radicals. I personally believe that it is very true to conclude that faith, of the burning hot nature that we are speaking of, has waned after many years of fluctuation since its early conception, most notably in the late 19th century. One needs not look further than Galileo and his meddling with the church to see this phenomenon. Christians back in those days were far more "radical" than the ones today, and the church knew that seemingly unwavering faith would have to be compromised with the findings of scientists such as Galileo. The lukewarm tendency to believe in God was inevitable with the accelerated understanding of our universe that science has provided. To me, it's not necessarily a bad thing that religion has finally begun to retreat ground in the face of science but, as I have mentioned before, this is not what any particular set of beliefs commands of its followers. It must be noted, however, that this depolarization is not solely caused by scientific breakthroughs but also by the development of equal rights and modernization of human equality.

The main contributor to the lukewarm faith epidemic is the picking and choosing of scripture to abide by or ignore. Many things bother me about picking and choosing what to believe. For one, the age of our beloved mother Earth. I'm sure you've heard of the theory that a day in the book of genesis could have been a thousand or even a million years. This particular idea, to me, is simply conceding in the face of modern science which has proved the Earth is most certainly not merely 6000 years old. I recently read an article by a Christian apologist who foolishly tried to claim that continental drift, which occurred over millions of years, inch by inch, fitted in perfectly with the Biblical portrayal of the world. He claimed that the continents “could have moved at a much faster rate" back in the day, thereby still staying true to the young earth ideology. How preposterous of a self claimed scientist to ignore the power of heat friction that would have surely caused Armageddon had the continents moved at such a rate. But, I digress.

Another aspect of the Christian faith that apologists have blindly tried to weave together with modern day science is our beautiful predecessors, the dinosaurs. Countless articles have been written about a few "mistranslated words" in their vain attempts to reconcile the proof that dinosaurs existed with the Biblical account of world history. What gets me is that they completely ignore the evidence that proves these larger than life creatures roamed the planet many eons before we were ever blessed by God to dwell in it. The most over used rebuttal of this is that carbon dating "cannot be trusted". Well, if one can claim to have an original depiction of the Bible because of many corroborative copies, then it is equally fair to conclude that that vast amount of skeletal remains that have been carbon dated are also just as accurate. Evolution, particularly micro evolution, is my personal favorite in the list of culprits that cause lukewarm faith within religion. Despite there being absolutely no mentioning of it in the Bible, God's inerrant and apparently perfect word, Christian scientists still take a few steps back in the face of scientific evidence. Again, I most certainly do not have a problem with the Christian community succumbing to the acceleration of science, but it really does go against what their god asks of them in their faith in him.

The last two points I will make are of a social nature. Women being ordained, which is obviously something the Bible would never utter, is the first. We have picked and chosen what to believe in light of our ever growing equality. Once more, this isn’t a bad thing in my eyes. The second is the abolishment of slavery in the modern world in light of, well, common sense. I am very aware that I have been rather sketchy with the list of things that I believe can be attributed to a person of lukewarm faith, so I apologize for not going into more detail on matters such as the age of the Earth or Dinosaurs. Rest assured that such matters will be dissected with further precision in future posts.

I feel as though, in light of the recent recession of faith since its conception, that it is fair to assume that one day religion it will inevitably be completely eradicated. With the acceleration of science, and human logic in the social sphere, religious dogma and myths are bound to eventually die out. Who knows, maybe one day we won’t give homosexuals a hard time because a book told us to, or make unscientific claims on something as scientific as the evolution of our race or the age of the world we occupy. I am confident this day will come, but won’t be waiting for it as eagerly as I am waiting for Jesus' second coming! But, that's a whole other topic which I look forward to commenting on soon.

Before concluding, I would like to express my admiration of the groups of people like the ones at www.answeresingenesis.com. Despite using apologetics in wrestling with science and a minimal amount of actual research, I appreciate the hardnosed defense of their faith without conceding anything to science. Of course, this is foolish in the sense that they are essentially bringing a knife to a gun fight when going up against science with apologetics, but nonetheless, their faith is one to be in awe of. If any of what the Bible says about heaven and getting in there is true, then they're surely invited to the party! The basic message I am trying to convey here is that you cannot have your cake and eat it too. It's just not how the world works. I plead with all those that call themselves Christian to analyze the passage highlighted in this blog (Revelation 3: 15-16) and evaluate their own "faith". To fall in love, you must jump. To hopefully fall into heaven, you must jump farther than your mind may let you. In this case, don't defend your religion by conceding points and picking and choosing scripture, but take a stand. You're either hot, and do everything that your faith requires, however outdated or preposterous it is, or you're cold, and give in to the modernization of scientific and social concepts while conceding that the book you preach from may be outdated. Jesus said he doesn't want lukewarm.

The Everlasting Word of God

It's always been in my nature to argue. Not in the sense that I would go out and disagree with anything and everything just to get the thrill of a good "heated debate", but I love defending my position. This little trait is ever apparent when the topic of God arises in social situations. I love it. Nothing satisfies me more than hearing someone else's opinion about this most important of topics, sharing my own and providing reasons for my convictions. It pains me to say, but there is also a kind of satisfaction in being proven wrong at times. It's like I missed something, or just plain ignored it, and then, in the heat of the battle, it was re iterated back to me in a way I could see my own misinformed opinion. I will never admit it to my foe at the time (no one likes looking stupid, eh), but when they bring something up for which I was mistaken, I get a sort of thrill. It's like I'm one step closer to possibly knowing what this whole mess is about. So, this passion for debate has ignited many conversations with friends about God and theology. Most of them being about the god of the Bible, I recall endless hours spent quoting scripture and weaving my way through fact, fiction and, my personal favorite, interpretation. One very interesting phenomenon I noticed while talking with Christians about their theology is how often they excuse some of the claims of their Holy book with the Argument of Context.

To put it simply, the Argument of Context claims that a particular notion is exempt from rational judgment and scrutiny because of the time it was written. The obvious place to start looking for ludicrous claims in the Bible is our beloved Old Testament. I must confess, it really makes for a good read at times because it includes a lot of the essentials needed to compile a gripping plot and amusing story. Containing violence, deceit, incredible bravery, victory against impossible odds, romance, debauchery, forgiveness, fiery judgment and weeklong parties, it's quite surely Earth's bestselling book ever. To begin on a quite shocking note, the Old Testament has some warped views on rape, saying that a women who is violated must marry her attacker and, in some cases, even be stoned to death with him because she didn't have the presence of mind to call for help (see Deuteronomy 22: 23-24 and 28-29). Even though I'm sure some radical people out there still hold some of these views today, the greater portion of humanity can agree they are somewhat "far-fetched". Especially when considering the punishment of death for homosexuals and non-believers (see Leviticus 20: 13 and 2 Chronicles 15: 12-13). The god of the Old Testament also has assassins on his pay-roll. Yes, the angels of death are of great importance to our father (see Exodus 23: 23). To end this rather bitter paragraph on a somewhat funnier note, I need not refer further than Deuteronomy 23: 1, where a man whose testicles are crushed or cut off cannot enter the Assembly of God. The line's gotta be drawn somewhere right!?

Any Christian would refute that the Old Testament is particularly that; old. I would be ignorant in saying that I did not recognize Jesus as "revolutionizing" this law. The bible presents him as challenging the teachers of the law during his time on Earth and even, in some cases, intensifying the law. Only one thing troubles me slightly. If we look up Matthew 5: 17-20, Jesus seems to be a firm upholder of the Law of Moses. He even says that "until Heaven and Earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the law until everything is accomplished". So, according to this quotation, we should still kill homosexuals and heathens while also condemning a woman to marry a man who rapes her. Nevertheless, this little contradiction does nothing more than highlight some of the inconsistencies in the text of the Bible. For the rest of this essay, I will humbly assume that Jesus does practice what he preaches in that he loves everyone and doesn't have any particular desire to demolish the so called "wicked". It is interesting to note though, if we assume that Jesus did come to revolutionize the old law, that "God's word" is anything but eternal. It had to be changed to work for a new age on Earth. How long before we need to amend our already revised Holy books to fit in with our image of the world and how we think it should be governed by our creator. Before you know it, we will be quoting from the Newer and Newest Testaments, too!

While the New Testament is far less radical, it does contain some verses that may raise a few eye brows in the 21st century. The first I will cite is one previously used on this blog, and refers to Paul's chauvinistic treatment of women (see 1 Timothy 2: 11-12). The context of argument will undoubtedly refute that times were different back then; women didn't have the rights they do now. Fair enough. But if we make that claim, then our Bible is severely outdated and is in need of revision, much like the kind of revision Jesus gave the Old Testament. Another not-so-crazy yet obsolete verse in the Bible is when Jesus teaches that if a man is to even look at a woman with lust in his eyes he has committed adultery with her in his heart, and therefore is subject to the appropriate punishment. I won’t be audacious enough to speak for the entire male population here, but I simply doubt there is a man alive today that has not and does not continue to commit that dyer sin. It simply seems out of touch with today's culture. The final passage I would like to bring under the magnifying glass is the chapter in 2 Corinthians warning good, law abiding Christians to not be "yoked" with non believers. The first two sentences in the passage claim that all non believers are wicked people who dwell in darkness. A stark comparison to the believer forever embellished in light and righteousness. Only religion could come up with such derisive ideas. Aren't we all designed to appreciate and value our diversity? Did Jesus not teach us to love one another unconditionally and without a price tag? This last passage, found in 2 Corinthians 6: 14-18, pains me more than any other in the New Testament. It preaches ignorance and the idea that we should not learn about our fellow humans and appreciate our differences but instead, advises Christians to stick to the pack so as to not waste time discovering the dark unbeliever who will surely have nothing in common with a child of the Bible. This seems to be yet another ploy by religion to keep its followers in line and from discovering the wonders of interaction with people of different convictions. It seems our world is not just being torn and divided by wars fought in the name of different gods, but also by the prevention of love amidst two varying individuals. How very sad.

To summarize, the argument of context is one essential to a Christian in defending their faith. How else would you explain separatism, murder and rape? It is inevitable that such problems would arise when constructing an eternal book of worship about God, especially when written by humans. I realize I have extensively criticized the Bible in this post and concede that I don't believe it is entirely filled with such ludicrous, outdated and obsolete claims. I'm very sure, what with all religions being so similar to one another, that quite possibly all other forms of belief consist of such passages unknown in today's modern world. The message I am trying to convey is that if we have to take so much of this Holy book in context now, how much longer will it be before it is utterly out of tune with reality and outdated? Although a Christian, Muslim or Jew might need context to justify their beliefs, God does not. If any of these books were his word, they would be truly everlasting.....

Our Father

With tears streaking down our faces, my brother and I ponderously walked through the front door of our home in London. My Mom ran to hold us and investigate what had caused this most dramatic of entrances. Not deferring from the usual, Dad was calmly watching the news, not really taking much notice as we began to describe the screaming gang of older boys who had picked a fight with us. Naturally, my mother was saddened to hear this but above all, grateful that we were OK. This reaction did not surprise either of us in the least. Dad's reaction, however, did. He immediately rose from his slumber state of meditation and said he was going to the park to fix this. I pleaded with him to stay home as the three of us where scared of what might transpire between the gruesome gang of loitering teens and my Father. Stubborn as ever, he told me to stop crying and take care of my mom and brother as he left the house. Half an hour later he returned; calm and cool as ever taking his throne and continuing his afternoon perusal of the daily news. When we asked what had happened he didn't tell us any details but assured us we would no longer face problems while playing at the park. I am a peaceful character at heart, but how could a kid not feel satisfied at his Dad kicking the butts of some bullies? With a fair amount of certainty I can confirm for both my brother and I that we had never felt more protected, safe and comforted than on that day.

We come into the world as very dependent beings, in constant need to be loved and nurtured. It is my personal belief that this necessity sticks with us forever as human beings while we go about looking for safe and secure situations to dwell in. The person we see after the stork drops us off is our mother; caring and loving enough not be turned away by the piles of poop she will inevitably wipe away. The second being we come to know is the man of the house. We look to our fathers for support and a type of love that is very different than that of our mothers. Whether you're a guy or a girl, you will always look to your dad to take care of things and, more importantly, to look out for you and be your crutch in a world where injuries are aplenty. Those of us unfortunate enough not to have our fathers around will instinctively look for an ample substitute. In some cases, a single mom takes on the arduous task of completing the duties of a father. In others, a child will look to older friends as role models or ideals of what a man should be. And this is the most important thing a father does for his little girl or boy. He shows his daughter how a woman is to be treated by the opposite sex; with respect, equality and, above all, love. On the flip side, it is also his duty to show his son how to treat a woman and be "a real man". In extreme cases, our need for a father figure drives us to gangs. The family feel of a "band of brothers" attempts to fill the gaping hole of a missing father. Sadly, it fails. Judging by human history and religion in particular, we have taken our search for a Daddy and, somehow, found God.....

Many religious people I know have answered that having God has gotten them through the tough times in life and, in some cases, even saved them. The notion I presented in the previous post about us possibly creating God in our image is bolstered by this glaring fact that we have taken the attributes normally used to describe our fathers and, after adding a good dose of Omni, decided that God is also that way. Our naturally human need to be comforted and consoled, coupled together with our impatience and need for answers, has led us to find the nearest thesaurus and begin professing to the world about how God is.

What I've found rather ironic while reading about different religion and their ideas of God's nature is that they all glorify him in saying that he is "indescribable" or "too big for a human to comprehend", yet have all arrived to the conclusion that God is the proud owner of a penis (and well endowed, I imagine)! One thing that bothers me greatly is why humans have decided God has to be male. I mean, why can't "he" be a female? We all come out of one, so it logically follows that the first human would as well. Or, screw that, why does God, the creator of everything we can see or touch, have to be a man or a women? It makes no sense to me at all. The only conclusion I have been able to arrive to is that our male dominated and chauvinistic society decided to create God in their image. Just look at when all three of the world religion today were born; Islam has been around since the year 600 ad, Christianity since the a couple decades after the death of Christ and Judaism since, well, a really, really long time ago. Think about how only recently women have been granted equality, on paper anyway, and how it must have been nearly two millennia ago! I mean, women had nearly zero rights. After scrutinizing the Old Testament you can find a wealth of passages that display the inferiority of women in the bible. The New Testament is less notorious about this and the most diabolical breach of women’s rights I could find was Paul telling the females to "please just shut up" (see 1 Timothy 2: 11-12). I don't mean to pick on the Bible here as the rights of women are terribly toyed with by all three of these religions. This, to me, also goes along with how we created God in our image, and heavily relied upon the culture and tradition at the time of "conception". Sadly, with these religions being heavily outdated, women as second class citizens were just part of such traditions. How unfortunate.

It may seem trivial, but the idea of God as a father is a very important one. I believe it highlights the fact that the need to be loved and comforted drove us to create such patriarchal and bigoted ideas of our creator without being humble enough to accept that maybe "he" is really indescribable. As for the rest of this lovely blog, I will (and this pains me greatly to say) conform to what society has unanimously decided in that God will be referred to as he. In no way, however, do I actually believe God is an old man with a white bread who hails in the skies and doesn’t really like women. I certainly do, and I believe I was created in his image so he must love the ladies. It is sad to retort but, in a world where fathers are fast disappearing, God has had to “take the high road” and serve as an ample substitute. I really don't think our one creator would be happy with having to act in place of the flawed humans he created. He's just too awesome for that!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5gNYVia2rg