Beginning can be read here.

Sample SECTION: For the love of God, THINK FOR YOURSELF

 

Consider the following example…  “The Bible says, Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.”  I shit you not: that came out of a preacher (that I provoked) less than two months ago…yep…prejudice and ignorance are alive and well in 2019.  Because of the path of division that we accept, I was on the phone with… forgive me if I don’t get the phrasing precisely correct, but I believe he described himself as either the outreach leader or compassion minister.  While neither of those titles is even remotely accurate, that’s more or less how he referred to himself.  This wasn’t a dying church, either, which can be translated as… it was a mega-church,  complete with preaching holograms and ridiculous, condescending replicas of Harry Potter crests.  

He had reached out to me after I responded to an email I received, thanking me for my contribution last year. When I had a job, I tithed 10%. I even tithed $1000 when I sold a possession for $10,000 last fall, though I was unemployed.  Look at that! I knew it. Shameless virtue signaling!  Slow your roll, Poppy.  I would rather stay anonymous for now, remember. Besides, it took every bit of that good intent to quiet the monkey mind, so you bet your ass I include it. 

Now for the fun part of the conversation. This guy was very proud of how many gay people attended his church.  His exact words were, “It’s not discrimination that they can’t hold positions of leadership. You see because no unmarried congregant that’s living in sin could hold a position of leadership either.”  Rrrright… still moronic, but not the same thing. I pointed that out to him and told him in no uncertain terms that he was not following the example of Jesus.  So what?  I know Buddha too.  Though…  I am closest to the smiling fat version. Big lesson there.  Anyway, “No, you are not, sir!” really got him going.  He actually hung up on me.  No kidding.  I guess he didn’t like my answer to his question.  He asked, indignantly, “IF I am not following the example of Jesus Christ, why, THEN, do we have so many gay people that attend our church?” To which, I calmly replied, “That’s an easy one. You’re the best of bad options. You have great music and a relaxed dress code.” That was when he so eloquently used his Adam and Steve rebuttal.  I suppose, “Because you ate all the other churches,” would’ve also worked, but I think he would have been even more unwilling to accept that. Given that they have served their clearly utilitarian purpose, which was to enable the core teachings to spread across continents and millennia without the aid of anything even remotely resembling the technology we currently possess, why then do we still assume the parts of ancient, sacred texts that relate to strict transference are valid.  You know… nothing shall be added or taken away?  Still? Why? Remember, there was no printing press present at the council of Nicaea.  Just a bunch of bishops that were already a pale reflection of their counterparts from a few centuries earlier.  If the message changes because we change, shouldn’t any possibility, however unlikely it may seem, be judged by modern standards?