The Six G-ds of Christianity
There is a discussion brewing in the Jesus Worship blogosphere on the question of ” Is Christianity really monotheistic ”. This is in response to a post, on the subject of the unquestioning Christian .
There is a “motivational” poster, with the headline “Ten signs you are an unquestioning Christian”. One of these (either number one or ten) deals with monotheism. To wit: “You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of G-ds claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of your G-d.” Some writers are promising/threatening to write about all ten of these arguments, and the feature on monotheism is the first.
PG is a recovering Baptist, who is severely alienated from Jesus. He does suspect that there is a G-d, and is in no way an “atheist”. The tracts linked to above tend to break down the discussion to atheists vs. christians, which is highly misleading.
PG has been knocking around for some time the idea of a post about the six G-ds of Jesus Worshipers. The appearance of this series…at blogs that ban PG from commenting…has spurred him into action. Whether or not there will be more comments (from PG) remains to be seen.
Christianity claims to be a monotheistic religion. This means, there is only one G-d. In contrast, the Romans and Greeks had G-ds and G-ddesses galore, and the Hindus have literally millions of deities. In what was claimed by some as an advancement, the Jews worshiped one G-d. (Zoraroastrians are said to be monotheistic, and did it before the Jews. There may be others.)
One of the sacred tracts of Judaism and Christianity is the ten commandments . The first three relate to the concept of monotheism, and the proper way to talk about G-d.
1-Thou shalt have no other G-ds before me.
2-Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy G-d am a jealous G-d, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
3-Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy G-d in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
As a side note, PG has heard something about the use of Lord as a name for G-d. The riff is that “Lord” was an expression for an English nobleman. When the Bible was translated by James I, his workers used the L word as a synonym for G-d. The words for G-d in the Greek and Hebrew texts that comprised the Bible do not translate as Lord…that word was inserted by the anglocentric workers of James I. This is something that PG read in a book by Tom Robbins, and has no other source for. It may, or may not be true. If it is, then it just might be a violation of the third commandment.
Getting back to monotheism, does Christianity live up to the first commandment? This may seem to be a silly question when you consider the concept of the trinity. At some point in the early days of Jesus Worship, a decision was made to split G-d into three parts. We now had the father, the son, and the holy ghost. (Which makes for a neat blessing…the father the son the holy ghost, whoever eats fastest gets the most) The first commandment is still in effect, but, well, you just have to understand. The Jews continued to worship one G-d, and when Mohammed started his franchise, he changed the name to Allah. In that version, there is no G-d but Allah, and Mohammed is his messenger.
Meanwhile, the Jesus Worshipers were good at converting and reproducing, and soon had a very popular religion. But was it one G-d only? The faith had a book of ancient texts that they call “the word of G-d”. The fact that it was written, copied, edited and translated by man did not stop folks. The first commandment would seem to prohibit this custom, but, you just have to believe.
PG is willing to concede the point that he doesn’t understand the concept of the Trinity. He thinks it is a concoction of the Council of Nicea, and a violation of the first commandment. This is something that seems to happen a lot with Christianity…to proclaim one thing as a rule, to apparently violate that rule, but have a clever explanation that few seem to understand.
This does not explain the other G-ds of Christianity. For this discussion, we will focus on three…the Bible, Satan, and Salvation.
The Catholic Church had a conference to establish a consistent canon for their church. This conference became known as the Council of Nicea. (This conference is where the concept of the Triune G-d was formulated.) The texts in use by the church at the time were collected in one book. Some texts were not used, and there is a good possibility that the texts that were used were edited. This committee effort became known as the Bible.
During the protestant reformation, the new churches needed a source for their authority over the people. It was during this time that the concept of the Bible as the “Word of G-d” became known. This in effect made a G-d out of a book. This is in direct defiance of the First Commandment, which teaches to have no other G-d before you.
The book has been interpreted into many languages, and the interpretations have been interpreted. The star of the New Testament, Jesus, spoke Aramaic. His words were recorded, in Greek, many years after he *died*. Any quote from Jesus has been translated at least twice. This is from texts that were written many years after he lived. And yet, people talk about what Jesus taught, and have confidence, that they know what they are talking about. (The only things we know about Jesus is what the Council of Nicea chose to tell us.)
At some point, the idea began to float around that the Bible was not only the word of G-d, but that it was inerrant…that is, without errors. This would presume that no body in the chain of production made a mistake. This includes a scribe copying a text, and a Catholic editor assembling a canon. Nobody translating ancient languages, from ragged source materials, made a mistake. The people who make this claim seem to assume that they have a perfect understanding of this text. Is it a coincidence that the spell check suggestion for inerrant is ignorant?
This one is too blatant to let slide. When you declare a text to be the “word of G-d”, you are making a G-d out of a book. There is a semantic argument to be made… you can say that this isn’t worship. Lets say it out loud… calling the Bible the “word of G-d” makes a G-d out of a book, in violation of the First Commandment. This is not monotheism.
A quick look at the way Satan is treated by the church shows a curious similarity to worship. Yes, it is backhanded worship, and lots of negative things are said about Beelzebub. He with the horns and tail is given credit for all kinds of powers, and needs to be fought (with human collateral damage). Yes, Jesus Worshipers give the Devil his due, and then some.
The last “G-d” that we will look at today is Salvation, or the Christian scheme for life after death. Anyone living in the USA has heard this plan a thousand times, and many agree with it. Some do not agree with it. It is none of your business how PG feels. (Your guess is probably correct.)
What is undeniable is the importance placed on salvation in Christianity. It is discussed in every church meeting, often at top volume, and with dramatics that would shame a ham actor. Salvation is said to justify all the rudeness and verbal abuse that Jesus Worshiper inflict on their neighbors. If you do not agree with the concept of Salvation, you have no business belonging to a Christian Church.
Does this hysterical emphasis on Salvation make a G-d out of the concept? As with the Bible and Satan, it is a matter of perspective. A good argument could be made that Jesus Worshipers treat these three items with G-d like devotion, and make G-ds out of them.
Pictures are from The Library of Congress. This is a repost.
Did Joseph Think It Was His Kid?
As you may have heard, SCOTUS is hearing oral, and possibly anal, arguments about gay marriage today. In a stroke of irony, this is day after March 25, nine months before Christmas. In other words, a crucial day, in the most famous unconsummated marriage in history.
PG began to ponder the traditional marriage of Joseph and Mary. Apparently, Joseph’s last name is lost to history. The question of the day is “when did Joseph and Mary get married?”. Facilities such as Liberty Gospel Tracts and Fish Eaters Traditional Catholic Forum have answers.
LGT (the B got kicked out for some reason) contributes a bible passage, Matthew 1:18-19. 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. 19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
Put her away in the privy? That is some kinky business there. Maybe the Christians and Jews have it all wrong. The thirds Abrahamic religion, Islam, might have the answer. A site, TurnToIslam, has another point of view about the traditional definition of marriage.
What about Mary, Jesus’ Mother peace be upon both of them? How old was she when she got pregnant? Not only was it a custom in the Arab society to Engage/Marry a young girl it was also common in the Jewish society. The case of Mary the mother of Jesus comes to mind, in non biblical sources she was between 11-14 years old when she conceived Jesus. Mary had already been “BETROTHED” to Joseph before conceiving Jesus. Joseph was a much older man. therefore Mary was younger than 11-14 years of age when she was “BETHROED” to Joseph. We Muslims would never call Joseph a Child Molester, nor would we refer to the “Holy Ghost” of the Bible, that “Impregnated” Mary as a “Rapist” or “Adulterer”.
“….it is possible that Mary gave birth to her Son when she was about thirteen or fourteen years of age….”Mary was approximately 14 years old when she got pregnant with Jesus. Joseph, Mary’s Husband is believed to be around 36. Mary was only 13 when she married Joseph. When she first was arranged with Joseph she was between 7 to 9 years old.”
According to the “Oxford Dictionary Bible” commentary, Mary (peace be upon her) was was 12 years old when she became impregnated. So if I want to be as silly and ridiculous as many of the Christians, I would respond to them by saying that Mary was psychologically and emotionally devastated for getting pregnant at a very young age. And speaking of “child molesting”, since most Christians believe that Jesus is the Creator of this universe, then why did G-D allow himself to enter life through a 12-year old young girl’s vagina? Please note that we Muslims love and respect Allah Almighty, Mary, Jesus and Allah’s Message to the People of the Book (The Jews and Christians). In other words, we Muslims would never make fun of Christianity through such childish topic like this one as many ridiculous Christians do make fun of Islam through our Prophet’s (peace be upon him) marriage.
Pictures are from The Library of Congress. This is a repost.
Debaptism
PG is a recovering Baptist. However, he was never baptized.
The Baptists like to pressure pre adolescent children into making a “Profession of Faith”. Every Sunday, the mob would sing “Just as I am” and the kids would walk down the aisle, shake the preachers hand, and be recruited into the Baptist way of life.
Every few weeks, the Church would fire up the Baptismal pool, and go to work. The house lights would dim, and the young Baptists were dunked in the pool.
A while back, the wiring was carelessly installed in a Baptist building. The Preacher was electrocuted when he used the microphone in the Baptismal Facility.
Now, the British have an answer. The Church of England goes for infant baptism, using the sprinkle on the noggin. This is too much for some, who object to the indoctrination into the cult of Jesus Worship, made before a person is eating solid food. One answer is the “Certificate of Debaptism”
The certificate is the work of the National Secular Society , which suggests hanging it in the loo. The various churches involved thus far decline to remove the baptized from any church records. The certificate is purely symbolic.
The text above is a repost. HT (for the original post) to JoeMyG-d. Pictures (with one obvious exception) are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
The importance of baptism is questionable. To some , it is a big deal. In a society without an official state religion, there are few measurable benefits or penalties for being registered in a religious organization. The concept of baptism is essentially symbolic. It is usually practiced on children, often on infants. Many adults realize that this children’s ritual no longer fits the person they are.
The National Secular Society has a web page about the efforts of people to make their de baptism official. Some of the stories are worth reading.
From Chris Taylor: After reading about other NSS members successfully managing to ‘de-baptise’ themselves I thought that I would give it a crack with the CofE mob. I emailed the diocese where I was dunked many years ago asking if I could be struck from the record as I have always thought it to be a load of old rubbish and said that if my parents had given me the choice of going through some sort of black magic voodoo ceremony performed by a probable child abuser in a dress I would, even at the age of 6 months, have said thanks but no thanks. I received a reply telling me that there was nothing that I could do about it. I replied asking again, suggesting that it would be easy, and a good christian deed (as these christers like to call it) to simply remove me from their register but it was to no avail. They replied again saying that it was just not possible and that I would just have to live with it. I would be interested to know if anyone has been successful with CofE as the RC lot seem to give different answers to different people. Maybe it depends on how god is feeling at the time!
Here is the reply sent by the Catholic Church, to someone who wanted to officially cut his ties :
If you have decided formally to renounce your Catholic faith, there is a simple procedure. You need to write to an official known as the diocesan chancellor for the area within which you were baptised. Give him as much detail as possible about where and when you were baptised, and briefly state the reasons why you wish no longer to be considered a member of the Catholic Church. Keep it factual and avoid anything that he might construe as aggressive or insulting to the Catholic religion.
A note will then be made in the baptismal register of the Church where you were baptised stating that you have formally renounced your membership of the Catholic Church. For all legal purposes, both in the law of the Church, and, where applicable, in civil law, you will no longer be considered a Catholic. It is not possible to cancel your baptism as such, since baptism is regarded by the Church as leaving an indelible mark on the soul, but of course, this will not concern you since you no longer believe in that.
2013 edition: If you click on the National Secular Society spot, you get this: “Sorry, the page ‘/official-debaptism.html’ is no longer available.” In it’s place is Debaptized dot com. The symbol of the new movement is the hair dryer. (Perhaps if Jesus had died at the hair salon, people would worship the hair dryer.) The Debaptist Church is pastored by Reverend Thomas Wubby.
TDC offers many services, including debaptism by proxy. Recently debaptized people include Andreas Jambak Nilsen, Ivan Popovski, Craig Nicholson, Christopher Price, and Peter Von Burg. The FAQ does not indicate if donations are tax deductible.
Profanity Free Post
The culture monk starts his caffeinated tour in midtown Atlanta today. Good luck finding a parking spot in that area. The wandering continues on La Vista road this afternoon, which is just a few miles away from Brookhaven. Will PG make it there? Only time will tell.
CM likes to put up material every morning, which is good. Today’s offering is Atlanta, Big Bibles, and Cussing…REALLY??? He got acquainted with the Atlanta custom of sitting in traffic for hours on end, and sought refuge at a mermaid enabled caffeine dispensary. A young lady, equipped with an artillery bible, said she had dropped out of the theater after being christianized. It seems as though the parts she played had too much bad language.
Many Jesus worshipers seem to have a thing about cusswords. Certain words are taboo. Many Jesus worshipers are rather smug about this prohibition.
The person who taught PG the most about Jesus was a former coworker, known here as the bully for Jesus. The man has anger management issues. Often, when he lost his temper, words like G-d, Jesus, and holy ghost would fire out of his mouth.
The third commandment is a very underrated suggestion. It is much more than G-d’s last name. PG decided long ago that using sacred names out of anger was a violation of the third commandment. Maybe, when the need for strong language presents itself, a person would do less harm by talking about reproduction and excretion, rather than father and son.
PG learned about CM in the comments at the thirty million hit dude, Matt Walsh. His latest offering relates to this issue. The title is Dear America, you’re too smart to listen to Beyonce’.
The subject of this discussion is Mr. Walsh’s dislike of popular music. The words could have been borrowed from any rant about music kids listen to today. This product has cusswords, promotes icky behavior, and is dumb, dumb, dumb.
To a certain point, PG agrees. The autotuned product of today is not that great. Unfortunately, Mr. Walsh does not have many suggestions for an alternative. The religion he touts is little more than a scheme for life after death.
The political POV Mr. Walsh offers is little more than endless Obama bashing. The post about Beyonce’ has the Obama reference in paragraph seven. (This counts five standalone words as a full paragraph.) What is the alternative here? Maybe Sarah Palin will put out an album of contemporary christian music. It would probably be an improvement.
Privilege Preservation Act
There is a piece of work in the Arizona legislature now, Senate Bill 1062. The proposed law would ” legally protect businesses that deny services to customers for religious reasons.” Some say it would be modern day Jim Crow, while others say that it would not be too bad.
Lawyers see the proposed law as a source of revenue. It would be tested in the marketplace, and challenged in the courts. The billable hours would accumulate. Attorneys created the marriage profit center, both traditional and same sex.
Jesus worship is the most popular religion in America. The believers enjoy a remarkable degree of privilege. Like many owners of privilege, they do not even know that it exists.
Many, if not most, POC are Jesus woshipers. On the one hand, POC have shouting rights as an oppressed population. On the other hand, many POC enjoy the benefits of christian privilege.
Privilege is a buzzword in some circles these days. When owners of privilege see this unearned advantage slips away, the privileged population gets testy. The proposed Arizona law would reconfirm the privileged status of Jesus worshipers.
Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
Disciple Discipline
The facebook link showed the way to a buzzfeed quiz, which promised to tell “Which One Of Jesus’s Disciples Are You?” “Reveal your New Testament alter ego.” PG does not know all of the disciples. There is Peter, Judas, and the others. In any event, this test will be a good excuse to post pictures, from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
This being bf buzzfeed, the questions are meme embedded in pictures. In other words, if you want to repeat the questions, you will have to type them out. The first question is about what country you would like to visit. In ancient Palestine, international travel was rare. Countries like Brazil, and Czech Republic, were way in the future. This is a non biblical question.
This is a goofy quiz. You are asked to choose a color, and a baby animal. You are asked to pick a month. Nine months are listed, from april to december. This coincides with the Mary’s reputed arrival date. The quiz is posted in February. Evidently, living in the present was not a disciple characteristic.
It gets better, You need to “choose a random household object.” The choices include sliced bread, scotch tape, and a tape measure. Maybe this is product placement advertising. This hypothesis might explain “choose a winter olympics event.”
The last one takes the prize. “Pick a Jesus.” You choose from nine pictures, winking Jesus, earnest Jesus, dancing baby Jesus, dime store Jesus, black Jesus, southpark Jesus, impressionist Jesus, dining Jesus, and crucified Jesus. So much Jesus, so little time.
At the end of the page, PG was drawing a blank. It seems as though he did not choose a household object. After clicking on scotch tape, the page went immediately to the answer, Saint Jude.
What Do You Mean By Jesus?
A blogger, using the name Culture Monk, posted a piece with the title A pastor’s secret sins…REALLY??? It is a familiar story. A professional Jesus worshiper is confronted about the improper conduct of an associate, and gets nasty. It turns out that the nasty senior pastor is also fooling around. It does not end well.
PG saw the story when there were no comments. He made the first one. If you want to be noticed, be the first comment that people see. One comment was edited, and is available in full at the original post.
Chamblee54 I see Jesus through the people that believe in him. My experience has been horrific. Since I don’t agree with the scheme for life after death, I see no reason to make excuses for Jesus.
Lee Don’t blame Jesus for the sins of the so-called “Christian Church.” Jesus reserved his greatest condemnation for the religious hypocrites of his day … Read Matthew 23 … You have been hurt, not by Jesus Christ, but by corrupt human beings who falsely claim to be followers of Jesus Christ.
Culture Monk Well said Lee. One of my goals in writing articles such as this one is not to condemn Jesus… but to condemn the hypocrisy of people who use the name of Jesus…….
It really comes down to what you mean when you say Jesus. The spirit that people make so much noise about has little in common with the man who lived in Palestine. If you don’t consider the Bible to be “the word of G-d,” then you might take what it says with caution. We really don’t know what Jesus said. All we know is what the magic book says.
To PG, it is impossible to separate Jesus from the misery that Jesus worshipers have caused. It is all part of the same entity. When a believer uses Jesus to hurt his neighbor, that is Jesus in action. When you say that you have been hurt by “corrupt” human beings, you are making excuses for Jesus.
A big part of the scheme is forgiveness for sins. Some say that Jesus paid the price for your sins. If that is the case, then Jesus can take the blame for what you do in his name. It should be noted that most Jesus worshipers are more interested in being forgiven, than in forgiving.
Is this hypocrisy, or just seeing Jesus as it really is? PG remembers the time when he learned the true nature of Jesus. He was working with an aggressive preacher. The man would lose his temper, and use Jesus to hurt people. He got plenty of support from other believers.
One day, the bully for Jesus had another temper tantrum. PG was shouted down and humiliated. When the tirade was over, the bully for Jesus got a phone call. The first thing he did, after picking up the phone, was to shout “I never felt better in my life.”
PG sees Jesus as a source of misery in his life. Nothing would please him more than to go the rest of his life without being confronted by the so-called son of G-d. If PG ever hears about the scheme for life after death again, it will be too soon. If you don’t agree with something the first ten thousand times you hear it, then it is highly unlikely that number ten thousand and one will make any difference.
Many Jesus worshipers are selfish. If they see someone being made uncomfortable with their verbal abuse, they turn up the volume. “I don’t care what man thinks, I care what G-d thinks.” This is another black eye for Jesus.
Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
2 comments