Why Christians Suck...

I am sure, on many counts, we do. As do many, many things, in all fairness. For starters, the world, and life, just ain't fair. The good die young and we are left with assholes for company. People who need money, can't ever find enough of it; those with time on their hands have no idea what to do with it. Toast always lands on the side that's buttered, etc.

But back to Christians. Irking the world with silly notions and unwanted good intentions; always talking about salvation, thanking an unseen God for everything, always trying to convert people to Christ who is not even older than Buddha, have no respect for tradition (most offensively, at the refusal to partake in traditional funeral rites)...

I shall not explain everything at one go; the virtue of brevity is, after all, that it is relatively painless. But primarily, Christians suck because the world would not let us be. Christians (and here, I am generalising -- there are just so many types) have an other-worldly mindset. We do not fixate on this life, but the next. We believe in the resurrection of the dead; in an ever living God who walked on earth as a man, and once, exchanged His life for ours. Much of this does not make sense. It might even seem mad, the fairy tale of idiots. But that is our liberty. The point is, such a perspective, from believing what we believe, will naturally manifest itself in acts and words that seem 'weird'.

As a liberal myself, I would ask that for those who have already concluded that Christianity is foolishness, to let us be. But for those who are curious enough, that seemingly reasonable and sane people should espouse the abovementioned views, I shall try my best to explain. At worst, you shall gain an amusing bar room anecdote to share. At best, might one not hope to be utterly blessed.

Be Clean

When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him.
And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.
And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.

-- Matthew 8:1-3

War and Glory

For fuck’s sake, there is no such thing. Perhaps I should qualify that as my own personal opinion. Sure, why not. And you’re of course entitled to your own. But that does not mean I can’t be right.

I say war is bad… yet all too soon, the macho rhetoric rears its bulbous, balding head (I infer this from observing the majority of its proponents) – surely, there is greater virtue in a courageous death, than living in cowardice. Well. Courage is indeed more admirable than cowardice. But when courage is stirred in the service of dubious schemes cloaked behind big words like “justice”, “destiny”, “freedom”, as has been the case for far too many wasteful wars that men have fought, then this courage is but stupidity.

To put it mildly, sentimental bullshit is the magic ingredient most served when men of power seek to stir other men to take the bullet in building the former’s ambitions. No? Is war “just”? Is war “unavoidable”? Why conduct a little experiment: round up the generals, presidents and other assorted people’s representatives who are creaming their pants for a fight, and satisfy their express desire, put them in a ring (or a coliseum) and let them fight their own battles. Considering the amount of money saved from conducting full-scale warfare, we would be happy to chip in for swords, spears, even costumes and, surely, many many medals and ribbons without number.

If I might be so presumptuous to say this, we shall have more peace than we ever had. In most cases, bluster will pass into silence as courage fails. As people appear taller on TV than in real life, talk is braver too, in cases where no balls are need to back it. And in cases where people pick up arms, well, on the bright side (very, very bright), the blood spilling is contained.

As for members of the populace who buy the idea that war can solve problems (and I have heard enough such talk, on how we can “take out” country A or country B with ease considering what we have in our arsenal), that some notion of national dignity requires taking up arms, please consider how disruptive war can be. School will close. Yippy. Supermarket shelves will go empty. Oops. The economy breaks down – where to find money, and how much is it worth anyway? Oh, dear.

So much better, is the stability that peace affords, for us to work, make money, enjoy creature comforts, hang out friends, and die in our own beds.

The Language of God, Francis Collins

“Did I not consider myself a scientist? Does a scientist draw conclusions without considering data? Could there be a more important question in all of human existence than 'Is there a God?'”

The Republic, Plato

'With our new luxuries we shall need doctors too, far more than we did before.'

'We certainly shall.'

'And the territory which was formerly enough to support us will now be too small.'

'That is undeniable.'

'If we are to have enough for pasture and plough, we shall have to cut a slice off our neighbours' territory. And if they too are no longer confining themselves to necessities and have embarked on the pursuit of unlimited material possessions, they will want a slice of ours too.'

'The consequence is inevitable.'

'And that will lead to war, Glaucon, will it not?'

'It will.'

Power Relations

Absolute power corrupts absolutely — this is a maxim held with as much faith as “apples fall from trees.” And it’s generally true: as much as any open drain is clogged with discarded trash, history is littered with jerks (to put in mildly) who have perpetrated the worst excesses for no better reason than because they could get away with it. Having power helped. A lot.

While people are rightly wary of power in political affairs, I have a feeling they are not wary enough about the flip-side influence of power in social affairs. This was impressed upon me during a recent conversation with workmates over lunch — and what better dessert is there than a bit of idle philosophising? — about the relative merit/justice of alternative power structures in the relations between men and women. Who should be under whose thumb, in other words. Among those present, one of took immense pride in her matriarchal family background — grannies, aunts, mums, etc held fearsome power in the household, while the men were effete, soft. It was the preferred order of the universe, the one that, self-evidently, made more sense.

For perhaps the wrong reasons, those present looked to me for a response, the supposed male chauvinist in that merry company. I beg to differ, really. I cannot blame people for the impression they get from the jokes I’m wont to crack, but I do not think they will derive the male chauvinist from my conduct.

But I digress. My point really, is that power should not be allowed to corrupt the relationship between men and women. What’s the value in robbing men of their spirit, turning them into hen-pecked, spineless slaves? What’s the joy in bullying women into soulless submission? A criminal waste of the human potential, both extremes. We should take a pause, get some sense of the immense potential in each person, and help each other achieve that. People who cannot see beyond a “power equation” in gender relations, well, let them be dealt in the only currency they understand, taking futile delight in meaningless triumphs, or else grovelling when the tables turn, filling their nasty lives with ultimately worthless alliances, chasing after fruitless things.

Of course, it is their liberty to do so, and to take delight in this.