I couldn’t sleep last night. I tossed and turned, thinking of everything from “the 6 second rule,” to the Bible, and the facts, or less than facts, which back the words scripted, bound in leather. Due to the political affiliation of fundamental religion, the heavy God theorem, I thought of the depth of the question: What would Jesus do? I usually hold particular politicians responsible for using and manipulating the God fearing. Last night, my head spun with the fact that the politicians only have the power the people give them. The hypocrisy-laden fundamentalists create the fertile ground of tyranny against the Jesus they pronounce as their savior. They march, donate, and vote to pass pro-Yahweh laws, criticizing and passing judgment, supporting laws that prohibit one’s own free agency, ignoring their own God with their profound judgment. It is these very same people who would crucify Jesus Christ, once again, with their self-righteous belief and their values taught from the pulpit of man. Jesus would once again be shackled and nailed to the cross, or maybe just held and tortured, without charges or trial, in Gitmo, by those who claim to believe in him the most.
Let’s begin with thou shall not kill. People picket clinics with painted signs bearing this commandment. They lobby for anti-abortion laws, trying to rob the people of God-given free will. They try to deny the right of choice promised by God’s will of choice. Under the premise of doing God’s work, they pass judgment. They claim it isn’t right. It’s murder. Yet, out of the other side of their mouths, they support capital punishment. They vote in favor of crucifixion, time after time, as if their form of death by man is different. They also send off their young to war, again supporting violence and death by the hand of man. They vote on the side of their Lord for man-induced death. Thou shall not kill wasn’t meant just for robbers who break into your home at night, or for unborn children; it was meant just as written: don’t kill, plain and simple. I guess they decided to modify those words, putting God in their terms, not themselves in God's. Christian? Laughable. I don’t remember a single Bible story where Jesus ever raised a weapon, not even to save his own life. He didn’t gather a violent army to protect himself against the Jews who were casting stones at him. He didn’t create a political party to outlaw the behaviors he deemed violent and unnecessary; he shed his blood to save those who didn’t know any better. The Bible-righteous should know this better than any of us, but some of us don’t need to focus on a two-thousand year old book to understand the Jesus principle, the people principle, also known as the human condition.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Baritone
Pam,
I am not a believer in any sense. Yet, I find your argument to be eloquent and heartfelt. I believe you are correct about the crass hypocrisy of most so called christians who use the bible as a weapon, a battering ram from which they cherry pick those bits that are useful to their ends, while ignoring large portions of its inconsistencies and contradictions.
Given what has been happening across the country in Republican held state legislatures and state houses, and what has been happening in Congress, I am very fearful of what could happen over the next several years should the Reps gain control of the WH and Congress along with more governorships and state houses.
I'm rather an old fart who witnessed the beginnings of this idealogical rift back in the 1950s through the 1970s and on to today. It has grown and festered all these years, and finally the Reps, social & fiscal conservatives, etal, are like rabid, incontinent bulls wreaking havoc in... well about any and every kind of shop you can imagine. It's all pretty scary stuff. We could see our country driven back to, I don't know when, the 19th century?... the 12th? These are some crazy assed people with a bunch of crazy assed ideas that are becoming the law of the land. May your god help us.
B
2 - Pam Messingham
Baritone, my personal spiritual beliefs are not stated in this article. They are far more complex. It is factual that Jesus walked the land, tried to help people, and was nailed to a cross. That is all documented. What I believe isn't the issue. What is the issue is those that claim to be our most faithful are basically hypocrites and they lack the real knowledge who Jesus Christ was.
Years ago while in college I learned Mary wasn't a virgin. Being raised Italian Catholic, something in me was shaken, deeply. My mother, who converted from southern baptist to Catholic raised us believing there were no mistakes or untruths in the bible. The thing about the bible, even though I went to Catholic school, was we didn't read it, therefore, I was unaware of all the conflicting messages. Learning that Mary's virginity was a translational issue shook everything I believed was religiously sound.
This is written about those that will argue Mary's virginity. This is written for those who cry out, constantly, Praise the Lord, while they bash gays, as if they weren't a part of the same ideal of their creationlist beliefs. It's about using religion to discriminate. It's about that Tea Party mentality that lobbys to save the world based on their personal judgment.
I know their Jesus never spoke on things such as unwanted pregnancy, homosexuality, or any sexual issue, whatsoever. They use Liviticus, which was pre Jesus. My take on it is don't corner people and say: Is Jesus your lord and savior? When they are clueless as to who they following and the meaning of his life.
I am not ready to expose my exact beliefs, but I know me well enough to know if you hit the right chord, I don't hold back, and with the right response, this one may do it.
As for the condition of the country. I know. I tell people all the time that we are in big trouble. If the people are ignorant enough to vote in Mitt, knowing he is bought and paid for, knowing he has lied over and over again, knowing they are casting a ton of lies onto the current administration, then we need to throw in the towel...America will be done with.
There is one conservative I know that called me on Friday and said: "I keep reading what you write and you are turning nme into a liberal." It isn't about lib/con, it isn't about God, it's about being human and tending to the needs of all so we can grow. This person is one of those fundamentalist tea party people.
If I had my way, Baritone, I would try to unite the country to vote anti both party to break the back of the two party strong hold. I want to see us have our power without being bought.
I have lost respect for both Americn government and fifty percent of it's people.
Thanks for the compliment, though! Much appreciated.
3 - Dr Dreadful
"What would Jesus do?" is an utterly useless question, because somehow it always turns out that what he would do is exactly what the questioner wants to do.
4 - El Bicho
I'm not sure you know the Bible as well as you think because your article puts forth incorrect presumptions.
"Let’s begin with thou shall not kill."
Isn't it "Thou shall nor murder"? There's a difference. And the Bible allows for killing when related to warfare, capital punishment, and self-defense.
I didn't move past the first page since their were so many inaccuracies.
5 - Clav
EB:
Did you deliberately misspell in your comment #4 to make a further point?
6 - Clav
They are far more complex. It is factual that Jesus walked the land, tried to help people, and was nailed to a cross.
Actually, no. All the documentation about Christ was written after he supposedly lived. There is no definitive, incontrovertible proof of his existence; and while there's no question that the myth has persisted over the centuries, no real evidence proving his existence beyond any doubt has ever been found.
There are Biblical scholars who conclude from the preponderance of writings about Christ (all written long after his alleged existence) that he, or someone much like the popular depiction of him, must have existed.
But, again, there is no scientific proof; his existence comes down to a matter of faith, just like the "existence" of god.
7 - Pam Messingham
Dread...I was basing the question simply on the way the man lived his life and how he would react. Not on how I would want him to react to any situation.
EB..Being raised in Catholic school I never once heard that commandment as thou shall not murder. Also, please tell me the difference between murder and killing. Maybe it's me, but I think they mean one in the same. Furthermore, I would like to hear one story where Jesus used violence or turned away from anyone in need. Feel free.
Baritone...told you...that door is opening.
8 - Pam Messingham
Clav,
I know that the earliest biblical account it 150 years after the crucifixion of Christ. Factually, there is little. The shroud of Turin, a piece of a cross, (though both could belong to anyone from that time, but the Vatican displays both artifacts) and a bone box, inscribed, James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus. Not that those aren't all common names, but it wasn't normal to etch all three names on a box used for human remains. Theologians agree the odds are in favor of this person walking the earth. They also note that man added to the bible to control certain social issues. The "religious" will disagree, saying there were consequences to be paid if they were to lie in their writings, as if we would ever be privy to know if and how those consequences played out.
Those biblical scholars you speak of would make a bible believer cringe, Clav, they can't even get past Marys virginity being a translational error, much less Lillith, the woman created from clay, just like Adam, before Eve, much less the fact that the authors of the bible added Jesus script to suit their own purpose. There are things in the bible that should lead one to seek out the real truth...lines like seek and you shall find. Again, I say, you can't find the dangers of alcohol in the Whiskey distillery.
The Catholics have even caved on evolution, though they would look quite foolish if they didn't at this stage of the game, wouldn't they? The fundamentalists will argue, some saying the world is only 2000 years old. It stymies my mind when I hear these statements. Science is good enough to make the best fundamentalist run to a doctor, but it is highly discredited when it comes to the truths about the bible. It boggles my mind.
9 - Pam Messingham
EB...and by the way...Jesus never spoke about killing anyone. Maybe you don't know your bible so well....that would be um...man's addition.
10 - Baronius
I can only address your questions as a Catholic. On the first topic, Pope Benedict stated it best back when he was a cardinal:
"Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia."
Those are pretty serious issues, abortion, war, et cetera. A lot of unserious people take positions on them without thinking them through. But it is possible to support a certain war and oppose all abortion and be consistent. There can be such a thing as a just war, although they're rare. There's no such thing as a just abortion.
On the second topic, it’s a matter of prudential judgment how to best serve the poor. You note that Jesus didn’t raise any armies; it’s also true that He didn’t create any government agencies. Does that mean it’s wrong to ever do so? Of course not. But decent people can disagree on the best way to perform acts of mercy. This is similar to the first topic. There are always cranks who don't want to do good and oppose government aid, but most people who are uncomfortable with the current level and methods of government aid genuinely want to do good.
Two other points. First, as always, I note your habit of name-calling. Secondly, it sounds like you’ve had some lousy religious experiences. You say that your school didn’t give you Bible instruction, and that your college taught you that Mary wasn’t a virgin. You also made a comment in a recent article to the effect that Americans don’t have food drives for fellow Americans, which tells me you've had some awful parishes. You should see more of what Catholicism really says and does, outside of your own bad experiences. You may be surprised.
11 - Baritone
Religion is evil. Yes, a lot of people do a lot of good things under the aegis of the church (or temple or synagogue or whatever,) but the core of all religion is evil. It is all about control. That element of control has served its purpose at times, but as with all things, control is power, and over the long run we humans do not do well with power. We almost invariably abuse it.
It is interesting and rather confounding that the three major monotheistic religions all come from the same place and out of largely the same traditions. They are quite similar in many ways. Each of the three so called holy books are also very similar. Each has many of the same elements as the other two - in some cases verbatim. Yet it is these three religions that have been the source of incredible hate and violence, often to the point of genocide for centuries. Personally, I wish they'd all take their holy books and place them where the sun don't shine.
B
12 - Pam Messingham
Baronious, I never said anything about food drives. Ever. So you have misquoted me.
Mary wasn't a virgin. This didn't have a thing to do with a parish. This was a college level religions class.
Being raised a Catholic, which I am not now, the bible was never taught and if you are a catholic, you know that to be true. Plus, we really don't want to note the changes in the Catholic church. We really don't want to go there. Those changes began in 1200 which made the Greeks split due to Roman super superiority thinking they had the right to change what was well established, supposedly by God. Did man have that right? Of course not.
As for my bad experiences with religion...What are you talking about? Just because my God gave me a logical mind, one that can look outside of a two thousand year old book of fables, doesn't mean I had bad religious experiences. I haven't.
I don't care if your pope says there are degrees of killing. I don't think it's okay for politicians to start wars because they can't agree or because they want something another country has, and then send young kids to fight their battles. Am I wrong? If I start a war, I promise, I will fight it. I wouldn't send my kids under the name of loyality, while I sat back, sucking up the best money can buy, getting fat on my own ego.
I don't understand how a pope can justify one method of man instilled death and deem another method wrong. It's illogical. I, also don't understand how any religion should or can have as much control in society, based on diverse religious sects.
As for abortion, I have six children. I, personally, would never opt to abort, but that doesn't mean that if I choose to, I shouldn't have that right.
When men and women in that religious sect can use murder/killing and the moral "against God" issue in abortion, shouldn't they apply it to all areas? Why isn't thou shall not bear false witness, you know, lie, bantered as much as thou shall not kill when used against abortion?
Or why isn't keeping the Sabbath day holy followed and kept? Who is man to deem which commandment is a priority? You are a sinner if you abort your baby. If you are a catholic, that is a mortal sin, but isn't it also a mortal sin if you simply tell a white lie, or choose to eat out on a Sunday? What does your pope say to those issues?
I know the Catholic religion well. I know many religions pretty well. So please, don't act like I'm clueless to religion. It isn't that I formed my opinions because I don't know, I formed them because I do.
As for how I write, the only thing I can say to you is this...if you don't like my writing, which I do from what I feel from the crux of my soul...then simply don't read it. That is your free will.
13 - Pam Messingham
Baritone, agreed, the Torah, the Bible, and the Koran...gotcha!
14 - Pam Messingham
Baritone, are the christians aware that the first testiment of the King James bible is almost exact to both the torah and the koran? The Jews don't believe the son of God has came, so they don't believe in Jesus. The Muslims believe in Jesus, just as they believe in their Mohamad, though in the Koran(Quran) they believe Jesus was a profit. Wouldn't many cringe if they knew the Muslims gave more creedence to Jesus than the Jews? Just a thought.
15 - Baronius
Pam, if you weren't taught the Bible, you had a poor Catholic upbringing. If you were taught in college that Mary wasn't a virgin, well, I don't know if that was a Catholic college or not, but it suggests that you haven't been taught the faith particularly well. Other comments, such as the one that fundamentalists believe the earth is 2000 years old, speak to that as well.
There is a word used in the Greek that could be translated as "virgin" or "young woman". If you say that the original text meant "young woman", then you could argue that the passage was mistranslated. But what about the O.T. passage declaring that the Messiah would be born of a virgin? That was Hebrew, not Greek. And Mary refers to herself as not knowing man. Different Greek phrase, I'm sure. College professors like to shock students into thinking differently, but sometimes they're more concerned with the impact of a statement than its veracity.
As for the food drive comment, didn't you just write an article about hunger in America in which you said that Americans don't assist each other?
16 - Glenn Contrarian
For the atheists here who point out the evil that is done in the name of religion, while I strongly disagree with nearly all religions and acknowledge their hypocrisy, you should all bear in mind the genocides that were carried out by those who were officially atheist...
...the point being, it's not religion that is evil, but men who allowed their power to corrupt them absolutely.
17 - Baritone
All of this parsing about the veracity of the bible and Mary's supposed virgin birthing of Jesus is tantamount to arguing about whether the earth is round. It's all pointless because its all balderdash.
However, I must say that the notion concerning Jesus' birth from a virgin womb was not seriously considered until hundreds of years after his supposed life.
BTW Bar - My wife was raised a catholic and went to catholic school all the way through high school. She also claims that the bible was rarely refered to.
Glenn - The problem with religion is that it, by its very nature, creates divisions between people, just as do considerations of nationality, ethnicity and other cultural differences. It creates an "us vs them mentality." Religion has been used as the basis for waring since humanity first came up with the notion of gods. My god or gods can kick your god or gods' ass[es]!
In this type of discussion someone always falls back on the argument that atheists have been responsible for terrible wars and mass killing just as have believers. But, in most every such case these people substituted The State, or some such, for god. Yes, Stalin was an avowed atheist. But traditional religion was replaced with the Soviet State as being god's spiritual equivalent, so it comes down to the same thing - a belief in something higher or bigger than ourselves for which we should be willing to sacrifice all. It's the same bullshit. And, as I think you know Glenn, Hitler was no atheist. He simply melded his admittedly demented religious beliefs with the trumped up glory of the Fatherland.
18 - Dan(Miller)
An Agnostic, I perhaps have no voice worth being heard here on the subject of the article. Still, here goes.
Ever since there have been politicians they have used religion, sometimes the "one true religion" whatever they may claim it to be, to promote causes and to get elected. Often the consequences have been unfortunate, occasionally they have been good.
Jesus is believed by some to have been in some ways uniquely the "Son of God" and hence perfect. We are not. Assuming that God gave us life, must he not also have provided the instinct for self-preservation needed to preserve and perpetuate mankind? Wars are sometimes necessary to that end. WWII is one example of where we fought and died to preserve life; there are others.
As to a government taxing people to provide charity to the unfortunate, I seem to recall that Jesus told us individually to be charitable to the less fortunate. I do not recall that he told us to foist that job off on a government.
19 - Baritone
Since the prevailing government was Roman and generally hostile, I doubt that it would have crossed anyone's mind to believe that it would in any effective manner provide for the poor.
Further, to believe that the private sector could or would adequately provide for the poor and the sick is ridiculous. Had that been the case, it is unlikely that so called government entitlement programs would have been deemed necessary in the first place.
A large manufacturer that would provide little if anything substantive to provide a safe and healthy work environment for its employees would almost certainly show little concern for the poor and sick in general except perhaps if they figured on getting some positive publicity and/or some kind of tax incentives by doing so.
I say again as I have on a # of occasions here at BC & elsewhere, the Right's philosophy is "I've got mine, fuck you."
20 - Glenn Contrarian
Baritone -
Religion doesn't in and of itself cause division so much as give people another excuse to encourage divisions they already wanted to have - otherwise, atheism wouldn't have resulted in the greatest genocides in human history.
21 - Doug Hunter
#19
And the left's philosphy is "Do as I say, bitch"
Some people just enjoy being the bitch more than others I suppose... hey, it's not even rape if you convince yourself you like it, right??
Much of the left's debate revolves around convincing people they would like it... of course not enough to do it freely without government mandate and ultimately the barrel of a gun... a little disingenuous. Me on the other hand... I don't give a shite what you do so long as you don't try and force me to participate, I'll also do my best to return the favor.
22 - Doug Hunter
#20
Very good point, I love to drag out that factiod on the genocides as well... drives the anti-religious crazy. Religions, and governments, are projections of the people and have the same inherent weaknesses, no more, no less.
I'm generally impressed with how forward looking and, dare I say, progressive christianity was. Even in secular society among those who reject the religion, much of the moral framework remains intact... of course hubris blinds people to this fact. They believe they came to their own moral conclusions seperate and apart from the society of judeo-christian values from which they came (and of course those are superior to everyone else's).
23 - Baronius
I personally never cared about Mary's virginity. That's a private matter as far as I'm concerned. I only wrote about it to correct an error in the article. The fact is, with Mary's virginity, or even Jesus's existence, there's no evidence of a sudden historical break in belief. As far back as we can get to the supposed events, records indicate the belief in those events. Every theory about a corruption in the texts, or a corruption of Christianity caused by the creation of the texts, smacks of conspiracy thinking. There were disputes early on, but the bulk of the people who claimed to be Christian made specific claims about what Christianity was.
24 - Baritone
Atheism did not cause any genocides. That is idiotic bullshit. There was no preaching of atheism or godlessness to enflame the public to war or mass killing. There was no atheistic tenet that was used to entice people to murder. There has been thousands of calls to arms in the name of some god or other.
You chose to ignore my assertion that in almost every case, traditional god believer religion was simply replaced with the State as the source of holiness, as it were. So no, it doesn't drive me crazy, because it's not true. Read some history people.
B
25 - Christopher Rose
The fact that the worst genocides have been committed by non faithists is one of those things that faithists use in a corrupt way to console themselves when people point out the evil of religion.
It is a classic red herring of course; the reason religion is evil is because it is based on a lie, a cruel, manipulative deception that exploits people on many levels.