christians hate science but need it.

Christian’s hate science because it doesn’t match up with their simplistic readings of the Bible. It contradicts a ‘literalistic’ reading of the ancient books like Genesis, Exodus, and Joshua. Sometimes this happens archaeologically and sometimes biologically. The contradictory coincidence lies in the fact that Christian’s need biologically based sciences like genetics to reinforce other parts of their worldview: namely that heterosexuality is natural and innate—genetic.

Guess what? You don’t get one without the other, creationists happen to be intellectual numbskulls who can’t get their intellect around two contradictions that they hold in tandem: namely that genetics confirms evolutionary theory and that sexuality is not genetic but socially constructed instead. Yes, that means my sexual tastes for men or women—just like my taste for apple pies rather than pumpkin pies—are personal preference and culturally associated.

You can’t accept one of the bull’s horn without accepting the other.

“What?!” You say. “That makes the word of God a lie!”

Nope, it makes your interpretation of the Bible: dumbassed. And it makes your use of science one-sided and bigoted.

Yes, I just used the term dumbass in a past-tense adjectival format to describe bigoted creationist thought—get over it.

christian ethics, or rather a lack there of.

Christians are so proud of their ethics and how spirit-based it can be. How mediocre and what propaganda of the crass multitude! “Did you feel the spirit move?” No, but 240 other people, subject to mass hysteria, did—and they felt exactly what you did: warm fuzzies like the feeling you get after eating grandma’s delicious apple pie. They were confirmed in their course of life and their actions, with the one acknowledgment that they submit themselves to the “voice, the move, the life of the spirit.” Simultaneously they condemn the move of the spirit when it differs from their own understanding of morality.

The move of the spirit is in the least garrulous and explainable. But the spirit’s voice has become so loud these days, that the spirit is comparable to a fair-worker with a megaphone advertising the next fashionable ploy to passersby. ‘Everyone’ hears it in a congregational radius and it is so static that you can create a system of judgment out of its “movement.”

“Don’t listen to secular music! Don’t have sex! Don’t lie! Don’t enjoy yourself in masturbation! Don’t not raise your hands in Church worship! Don’t think that you are not loving your neighbor! Don’t let homosexual persons preach! Don’t vote democratic! Doubt your motives at all times, doubt them so much that you can never actually judge yourself! Don’t spend frivolously! Worry about tomorrow! Trash those who doubt—it’s ok to pronounce that they are hell bound, they know they are anyway!” And myriad other don’ts and do’s. But the spirit moves: there are no do’s and don’ts in its command, its command is to live and love well, whatever that may look like.

These days its now much less a move of the spirit and moreso a christian calculus. As I already said, Christian’s suck at math, so I’m not surprised then at how simplistic their ethical thinking. What I am surprised about is their dishonesty and how easily they believe that middle-school algebra is heavenly impartation.

Let me say it loudly and clearly, anytime you are doing calculus about making decisions you are actually not facing an ethical dilemma or even having to make an ethical decision—you are not open to the spirit. Ethical decisions lie in the fact that you don’t know whether you will be right or wrong when you face them—and that you must make a decision anyway. The move of the spirit doesn’t predispose rights and wrongs: look at Abraham the spirit made him a murderer.

Least of all worries are decisions between right and wrong—harder decisions are made between right and right or wrong and wrong.

Let me let you in on a little secret, I’m not being blatant enough: ethical calculus is actually legal jurisprudence; that is the furthest things from the move of the spirit. Ethical calculus is the law. How heretical the “move of the spirit”  is in the church these days!

I say it’s time we pick up the cross of our  own experiences and follow after Christ. It’s time we stop relying on others to tell us what that cross is made of and where we should go.

I bless you, I say follow Christ! Live! Live with Christ! Christ is alive!

rethinking my blog. christians don’t forgive.

After a week break and alot of time to rethink my blog makeover I have finally decided to break the hiatus and bring to you a more discursive meditation on what I am doing here.

Central to Christian claims are the ideas of love, mercy, and forgiveness—a rather queer understanding of justice proceeds from this—namely injustice. I have noticed however that it is the tendency of churches these days to give up forgiveness, mercy, and love for a rather esoteric justice. Christianity has never really been a counter-cultural movement in its totality, the fact that the category Christian exists posits the point.

My blog is offensive, you all have noticed that, and hence it is scary—scary that a person could really mean what I have said, offensive that a person who knows you so well would go even further and voice those sayings. But it is also a parable—my blog writing are not about my feelings, they are rather about your feelings—your responses. They have grown past what I meant by them and they have become emotions inside of you–the reader.

The point is, if you are offended, and you consider yourself a Christian, and you are unable to look mercifully upon me, unable to forgive me, unable to love me—then are you really Christ-like? Or is it that you have come looking for justice? And really are you nothing more than a subject of a court made of gestures?

If forgiveness only forgives the forgiveable then forgiveness fades into nonexistence.

Because I really think that is true, I want to confirm your fears, I have meant every single thing I have said—but any condemnation, any anger, any injustice you have felt, well that is all your fault.

I will continue to polarize, because polarization brings out the ridiculousness of separations that we make between ourselves and others. Those feelings you have, the extent to which they are true to you—that is a measure of how you separate yourself from others. It is measured to you as you measure it to others.

What I invite here, is the reader who reads what I have to say, feels it, and embraces me. I challenge you to love—I don’t demand it. But in facing that you can or cannot love me, honesty becomes paramount. This challenge, I issue, proves that which most people feel uncomfortable admitting: it’s impossible to love everyone selflessly and immediately—loving is hard. Please let your discomfort settle for a moment. Have you stopped to ask yourself—when did I decide that I should love selflessly and immediately?

My point is, the lessons in my writings are manifold and reveal that challenges that we gloss over in our dishonesty. I’ve decided to continue writing the way I have. Your responses have egged me onward, confirmed my calling.  My goal, is to help people realize that loving, forgiving, and mercy cost deeply—a sickness unto death.

Practicing Safer Text Tuesdays: Purity and Danger by Mary Douglas.

To steal a line from one of my prof’s writings, I’ve decided to recommend a book or so from time to time so that we can learn to ‘practice safer texts.’

Incidentally, I’m also going to steal one of his book recommendations:

Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo

By: Mary Douglas

One Amazon reviewer states:

All cultures have definite ideas about what is clean and what is dirty. Drawing from previous hallmark works on how cultures make classifications (Levi-Strauss’s The Raw and the Cooked, etc.), Douglas makes clear and concise arguments about the use of ritual in separating that which is considered pure from what’s considered unclean. The convincing argument she makes is that such rituals and clearly defined boundaries of purity reinforce a society’s common definitions, increasing its unity and therefore its ability to work together to succeed. Additionally, Douglas alludes to Malinowski’s anxiety-reduction theories of totems to theorize that clear definitions of right and wrong and of clean and unclean reduce the stress in a given society, helping everyone to know who they are and what is expected of them. In fact, she feels, a lack of such distinctions can be fatal to the integrity of a group. If everyone went on their own deciding what was good or bad, there would be chaos – the danger alluded to in the title.

A highlight of the book is the chapter titled “Abominations of Leviticus”, in which she interprets the Jewish divisions between kosher and graev (no pork, no mixing of milk and meat, etc) in a cultural context. Here she shows that the Levites divided “pure” animals (deer, cattle, sheep, goats, etc) from those considered “mixed” (pig, rabbit, woodchuck), or having an undesirable combination of traits rather than just being dirty in aspect, as is commonly believed.

In other words, y’all need to check it out.

‘christian’ is not an adjective nor a prefix.

I’m so fucking tired of theological idiocies, but I’m even more tired of grammatical ones. Luckily, sometimes the two coincide. First off, “Christian” is not a fucking adjective. So many Christians are more concerned with the rotting of language via slang and words like: fuck, deuche, shit-bag, ass hole but totally miss out on how their own precious gem ‘Christian’ is rotting away. (Note usually at the merciless hands of ‘Christian entrepreneurship’).

I’m talking about the rise of phrases like: ‘christian music’, ‘the christian university’, ‘the christian book store’, ‘the religious right’ (which, lets face it, believes that it is composed completely of righteous Christians anyway), and ‘christian language’.

All of these labels are doing two things: separating yourselves into a heirarchy (Christian against secular) and making yourself look bad.

Everyone in their right mind knows that the advent of ‘christian music’ is possibly the worst thing that ever happened in the history of music. Christian music, and here I am not referring to hymns or gospels, but the shit that calls itself contemporary, well… sucks.

Anyone who has any musical taste will tell you that contemporary Christian music doesn’t even compare to the table scraps of real musical genius, but moreso recycles the dried out shit-patties left over from those who already ate the table scraps of much greater artists.

Let’s not forget that the ‘Christian music’ industry isn’t out to lead people in worship—that only happens to be a side-effect of what they’re doing—its number one goal is to make money, I mean why else would their music sound so studio-produced with such a disgusting sold-out sound? Why make this point, you may ask? Because contemporary ‘Christian artists’ are sell-outs! And if they weren’t you would have never heard of them—they sure as hell wouldn’t be in your ‘Christian bookstores’.

The ironic thing is that some ’secular’ artists have caught on to this market niche and have made even more money at it than ‘Christian bands’. They simply imply they are Christian by making some obscure implication, something that may sort of sound like a Biblical reference in their lyrics. Need examples? Evanescence, Creed, etc. This still doesn’t better ‘christian music’ artistically however, because usually these bands also suck major dick.

Thank God Christians have made it a point to separate their shit music and art from actual art, luckily that way you don’t actually mar the real creative impulse of innovative musical and lyrical talent.

Now onto another equally idiotic subject: ‘Christian universities’. Has anyone stopped to think about the implications of that conglomerated non-sense? Does it mean that all students are Christians? Or that Jesus Christ teaches their classes? And do ‘Christians’ really want a black lesbian teaching their classes anyway? Let me let you in on a secret:

Universities call themselves: ‘Christian Universities’ because they want your fucking money. They want insecure parents to think that it will harbor their children away from the wiles of the party-going-sex-addicted-drug-doing ’secular world’ of college life.

Guess what? I went to a so-called ‘Christian university’, take it from me IT DOESN’T WORK. People who want to have sex—have it, who want to smoke pot—smoke it, who want to drink alcohol—drink it, who want to do well in school—do well. And Christ taught me to hate the washed out bull shit adjective ‘Christian’. Something that she taught me is really just another idol that supposed ‘Christians’ worship.

I mean after all, do you really want Christ’s name attached to a shitty music album, or two four dollar bar of soap? Will that really wash away your sins?

christians suck at doing math.

So over the past few days, and since the inception of Vulgar Theology, I’ve had a few complaints. I mean, it was to be expected—I’m making fun of you. Without any real surprise most of the complaints are from church people and not from seekers—virgin seekers at least; in other words church people lay your fears to rest. I’m not turning away non-Christians, hopefully if all goes well, I’m turning away people who consider themselves champions of Christianity. Much of the criticism written has been done from the perspective that I contradict Biblical passages or have made unfounded assertions. Let’s ignore for the moment that I never asserted that I was backing up to scripture and lets ignore for the moment that my references to scripture are really just sneering jibes at Bibliolaters (those who worship the Bible as an idol). My assertions are of course divinely inspired and lets be honest you can’t argue with that. (For those of you who are without a clue, without a sense for humor, that was a joke—and yes another jab).

The reason why I am not founding my claims on the scriptural references, but rather on my interpretation of religion, theology, and Biblical passages is really quite simple: Christians can’t do math and have a terrible sense of smell. Or rather it might be best to say they refuse to do simple math when it comes to reading the Bible and wallow in their own bullshit while claiming perfect cleanliness. I mean, remember—cleanliness is close to godliness. Even the most talented engineers throw their math skills and engineering degrees out the window when it comes to reading ancient texts like the Bible, they happily grab a clothes pin—apply to the nose—and voila! Everyone becomes a blundering idiot, forgetting things like physics, chemistry, population theories, math and yes simplistic child-like reasoning.

What’s that you say? 1+1+1=1? If the Bible says it, it must be true! What’s that you say? Millions of men, not counting wives, children, and livestock migrated back into Israel after being enslaved for 400 years by the Pharaoh? If the number were only 2 million and they were lined up 10 abreast marching at a pace of 3 mile per hour how long would it take to cross an 8 mile stretch of the red sea? Well to quote another blog:

Start by assuming that a disciplined Army of two million men were to cross the Red Sea. The men march in formation, 10 men abreast and each row ten feet apart. They march at a cadence of three miles per hour. This means that in one hour, a three-mile-long column of men enter the sea. If you were standing in a viewing stand watching the men march by, 15,840 men per hour would march past.

For two million men to cross the Red Sea at this pace, it would take 126 hours. Assuming they march 12 hours per day (so the men are marching 36 miles per day), it would take 10.5 days for all two million men to walk past.

The reality of the situation is that the “Israelites” would not be a disciplined army of fit young men. The “Israelites” would consist of men, women and children, young and old, firm and infirm, well and diseased. Anyone who has traveled with children knows that the pace gets cut in half or more. And the most that people with children and elderly parents might walk in a day is more likely a total of five or ten miles per day. And do not forget that there are flocks as well. A million animals or more, which would further slow the pace and lengthen the column. Then there are all of the supplies. For the crossing point is eight miles wide, and there are no wells or rest stops along the bottom of the Red Sea. Each Israelite would need to be carrying food and water for himself/herself, along with food and water for the flocks as well.

Given all of these factors slowing the pace, any single person in this ragtag band would spend one to two days in the actual Red Sea. Imagine the amount of dung and feces that would be deposited by two million people and their flocks on the base of the Red Sea.

As you can see, common sense dictates that, in reality, crossing the Red Sea with two million people and their flocks would easily take a month or more.

Now of course that’s just one example. If of course you take the Bible literally, and my challenge is that no one takes the entire Bible literally, then my guess is you chuck out reason, chalk it up to miracles and then pick and choose what you believe as literal in the text anyway. My point is we all do, and I am ok with, but don’t be angry when we have different opinions on what is literal, or that I might not think of the Bible as authoritative in the same way you do. Hence my reticence to appeal to it as a source of authority, and my general appeals to my own theology as authoritative.

Now let’s see what Exodus 15:14-28 (NIV translation) says about the crossing:

¹⁵ Then the LORD said to Moses, “Why are you crying out to me? Tell the Israelites to move on. ¹⁶ Raise your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea to divide the water so that the Israelites can go through the sea on dry ground. ¹⁷ I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that they will go in after them. And I will gain glory through Pharaoh and all his army, through his chariots and his horsemen. ¹⁸ The Egyptians will know that I am the LORD when I gain glory through Pharaoh, his chariots and his horsemen.”

¹⁹ Then the angel of God, who had been traveling in front of Israel’s army, withdrew and went behind them. The pillar of cloud also moved from in front and stood behind them, ²⁰ coming between the armies of Egypt and Israel. Throughout the night the cloud brought darkness to the one side and light to the other side; so neither went near the other all night long.

²¹ Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night the LORD drove the sea back with a strong east wind and turned it into dry land. The waters were divided, ²² and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left.

²³ The Egyptians pursued them, and all Pharaoh’s horses and chariots and horsemen followed them into the sea. ²⁴ During the last watch of the night the LORD looked down from the pillar of fire and cloud at the Egyptian army and threw it into confusion. ²⁵ He made the wheels of their chariots come off so that they had difficulty driving. And the Egyptians said, “Let’s get away from the Israelites! The LORD is fighting for them against Egypt.”

²⁶ Then the LORD said to Moses, “Stretch out your hand over the sea so that the waters may flow back over the Egyptians and their chariots and horsemen.” ²⁷ Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and at daybreak the sea went back to its place. The Egyptians were fleeing toward it, and the LORD swept them into the sea. ²⁸ The water flowed back and covered the chariots and horsemen—the entire army of Pharaoh that had followed the Israelites into the sea. Not one of them survived.

Do you smell that? What is that?

BULL SHIT!

I mean the passage is utterly pervaded by this noxious odor of—impossibility. Notice, how all of the events happened in one night: “Throughout the night the cloud brought darkness to the one side and light to the other side; so neither went near the other all night long” (verse 20) and the ending point: “Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and at daybreak the sea went back to its place” (verse 27).  Ok church-goers, let’s hear your casuistry! Make your excuses—I mean arguments.

Remember I don’t care to appeal to the authority of the Bible because it only has as much authority as I care to give it. My only claim is that I consciously do what you often do unconsciously, that is dismiss and reinterpret the Biblical scriptures according to my own understanding.  Remember if you dismiss one part of the Bible because it’s unreasonable, or refuse to literally follow it’s instructions (gouge out your eye and cut off your hand) then you’ve already lost your claim to a literal interpretation. And honestly I don’t think there is anything wrong with not interpreting it literally—I do however sneer at those who claim literalism and then go about not really believing a literal interpretation. Basically, you are bull-shitting yourself and everyone around you, for the sake of your own need for simplicity. I mean live with a tiny smidgen of consistency for your own sake.

I mean, let’s be honest, I suck at math, but at least I am honest about it. I just have a sensitive nose, that’s all.

jesus christ was a black lesbian.

So many times Christendom puts a picture of Jesus on the wall of a church, and guess what? Jesus is easy on the eyes, and Jesus is white, Jesus may even have blonde hair and blue eyes. Jesus just so happens to be portrayed as the most affluent and powerful demographic out there folks. You might as well seal the deal folks, put Jesus in a powersuit with a killer portfolio in one hand running his hands through his $300 haircut while leaning on his red ferrari. The disciples must have been a bunch of yuppies with blackberries.

Guess what, you have fallen prey to ethnocentrism. But as opposed to telling you that you are wrong and biased for doing so (and trust me—you are biased), I’m just going to go ahead and tell you that it’s ok, it’s a necessary fault. Why?

Black people should be more than free to have a black Jesus, Latino’s a latino Jesus, Jews a jewish Jesus. Women a female Jesus, Queer people a queer Jesus, etc…

But none of these Jesuses should be normative. Not only is it a lesson in ethnocentrism, it’s a lesson in love.

So until you can see Jesus as a black lesbian woman, then you can’t really see Jesus at all. Why? Because you must first be able to see Jesus in a person before you can love them like God loves you.

Let’s face it, if you can’t imagine Jesus as being a black lesbian then you basically have failed the platinum commandment. Love your neighbor as Christ has loved you. Remember Jesus Christ wasn’t hung up on defining sins, Pharisees and Christians are.

christian altruism is pity and pride; agape is suicide.

At some point Christendom audaciously turned love into agapao—a sort of thoughtful selfless love. God died because of selfless love. Now christians everywhere go about proclaiming their ’selfless love’ for one another and live rich and spiritually costless lives. If you really think that you are able to love like Christ then kill yourself for your cause and at your funeral we will all proclaim your selfless sacrifice and christ-likeness, enjoy a good free meal, prematurely pronounce you as heaven bound and then move on with our lives–we’d be better of for it and you will have received the reward that you so desired. Selfless love doesn’t want to be sacrificed, which is exactly why it’s a sacrifice.

What Christendom means when it proclaims and praises its own selfless love is that it pities others who aren’t ’selfless’, or who are having difficulty maintaining the self-autonomy that the American dream demands of them. Pity for all is the most disgusting aspect of Christendom, it is pure pride and self-love. I’m thinking of many a Christian’s bullshit altruism that sinks low at the altar, that loudly proclaims its own sins—sins for the most part which are easily admitted and not so bad after all—and when all is said and done proudly walks back to its pew as an example of being a good “Christian.”

I don’t have pity for Christians I scoff at them. I disrespect their self-proclamations of love, and in doing so pay them a higher respect than their Christian altruism and Christian pity would. My pride is honest I stab you in the stomach, not the back. I pay you the hard respect of honesty.

“‘Pity for all’–would be hardness and tyranny toward you, my dear neighbor.” Your pity necessitates your elevation in pride, so be proud, pity your neighbor, but don’t pretend like it is a selfless love that rivals that of your ’savior’, after all if you love like that you don’t really have a savior, you really believe you have saved yourself and saved your neighbor.

christians idolize themselves.

1. The holy spirit you worship is really your human spirit; God’s spirit would never leave you able to speak. You can never capture God’s spirit in words, you can only ever capture your own experience.

2. The god that is knowable is after all only a statue—an idol of comfort.

3. Christendom worships the Bible as if it were God, when really it too is an idol, a stone statue, unmoving and dead. Christian values are the cross that Christ was crucified on.

4. Blessed are those who worship the living God, who moves and breathes and has life in the living Church. They worship the God who is resurrected from the cross of Christian values and idolization.

christianity’s Sin

Christians would have you believe that there is a hidden ‘list’ of ’sins’ out there and only they have the ‘right’ version of it.

If it hasn’t dawned on Christians yet, that ‘list’ is really their inherited cultural values, whether it be their regional, ecumenical, or national culture is still yet to be determined. They learn this ‘list’ from watching others in Christendom. They judge you by this list, and if they know you have a sense for this list they cast you out on the basis of your knowledge of the list. After all to reject the list is to reject all that is holy, pure, and good in the world. By the way if you reject this list you’re unholy, impure, evil, and probably haunted by the ghastly figure Satan.

Forget that Jesus asked that only the ‘father’ be called good. Strike that from your memory of scripture please.

You see what we have here is a difference in terminology. These Christians have a list of ’sins.’ As if sins were a list of proper nouns, static, unchanging, always and forever wrong in every case, absolute, immutable, amen.

Honestly, who believes that any cultural value is immutable? I recall older versions of this list saying that you can’t eat shrimp or boil a baby goat in its own mother’s milk. Hey and remember that time it was ok to have slaves? How fucked up was that?

Sin is where it’s at. And I do mean Sin with a capital ‘S.’ Sin is not captured by any particular action, it is not immutable, in fact it’s very personal. Let me enlighten you, Sin can be any action at anytime, while any action at anytime is not necessarily ‘Sin.’

It’s actually very hard to Sin, few have the passion to do it anymore, for the most part people wonder around feeling guilty about their ’sins.’ I’m sure God gets very tired of this. I’m pretty sure its the ‘mortal Sin’ of Christians—they don’t know how to forgive themselves so they ask others to do it for them. The need for forgiveness is not really asking for forgiveness, it’s a show of a Christian’s vampiric need to be reassured of just how important they are to the one they feel guilty about having offended. How else do you explain the existence of Christendom in the world and the existence of poor, unloved, unwanted, people? Aren’t the Church and these things antithetical?

Oh yeah, I forgot, Christians encourage vampirism.

Hey! Even I like a little vampirism from time to time. And for all of you Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson fans, here is a little Twilight for you:

Hey, I’m not a hater.

Aphorisms on purity.

1. God doesn’t want your sacrifices. God doesn’t want your guilt. God wants your happiness, your freedom, your love for the other. Happiness, freedom, and love are not sacrifices.

2. Christendom wants your guilt, it wants your money, it wants your time, and it wants your subordination. Christians want you to compare yourselves to them and feel lesser than they.

3. Of the types of Christian morality, two feature prominently to me: negativistic morality and positivistic morality.

Joanne Terrell distinguishes them by saying that negativistic theology ‘tells you how to be moral by telling you what you can and  cannot to do’. Positivistic morality ‘challenges us to live fully, it empowers us to live a good life, it is an act of creativity. It is taking pleasure in God’s creation.’

4. Guilt is not creative, it is inhibitive. Sin has been so individuated and interiorized that those who have spoken of the good news of freedom from sin are in fact inherently the biggest manufacturer of it.

Christians have created a framework that clearly labels ’sins’, so as to clearly blame and guilt each other. Christians inspire competitive holiness, a ‘more holier than thou’ attitude. But the kingdom of heaven is one of freedom from blame and guilt, freedom from sin, and genuine communion with the neighbor and with God. This is of course, the God of creation not the god who has been destroyed.

5. Sin boldly! And feel guilt no more, the God of grace is with you. Sacrifice your need for pride… I mean purity, and consequently you will have sacrificed your need for guilt. You are already forgiven, compete no more.

6. Your faith, not Christendom’s, has made you whole.

Oh the fear of dirty associations...

christian adultery.

How much better it would be if every Christian who made a monogamous commitment to a loved one were to philander against their partner than what is actually the case in Christendom.

Christians have sold themselves out to the state, they have promised fidelity to God but become the state’s whore. Sex-workers, forgive me on this one, you made no such commitment, you still have the honor of your word and I don’t consider you negatively.

Some Christians love the state so much that every fourth of July Sunday they get on their knees, open their mouths to pray, and happily give a blow-job to the state. It’s one thing to be giving a blow-job but its quite another to pretend like it is prayer.

I have respect for sex-workers, who keep their word, fulfill their promise and give someone pleasure while they are doing it. Christians on the other hand exalt nationality to the place of God and pretend as if they were not bending over and willfully inviting the state to take advantage of them. Which of course as we discussed earlier they don’t like,  because it would be taboo for Christians to enjoy any form of sex.

How did you become so dishonest that your fidelity for God became a tool of fidelity to your government? Don’t complain to me when you realize that no amount of philandering will guarantee you a safe-haven from religious persecution and that in the end you were being raped all along. You just so happened to simultaneously crucify Christ to your national zealotry. I’m not sure which is worse.

clumsiness is close to godliness.

Your road to heaven, your eternal salvation, your works? Let me tell you, you have made straight the path of the Lord. You have lined it with long lines of bull-shit, you have scrubbed it with piss, and you have obscured the way for others.

God bless those with clumsy feet, who have stumbled a crooked line of passion past your lines of bull-shit, through hypocritical worship services, moral failings, past the altar of publicly approved holy men and women and have learned to love in spite of all the confused self-righteous intstructions they have heard.

If it weren’t for their clumsy feet, there would be no living Christ and no Church–I’m glad they found their way to the door.

God loves sex.

Everyone thinks their shit don’t stink.  I mean lets be frank, most people think that the way they like sex is the normative standard for what other people like about sex or even who they have sex with.

Promiscuity is a word that others use to describe people who have more sex than they do. Who sets the standard for how much sex is too much anyway? — Rough paraphrase of Ted Jennings

I got news for you: anything that you like is something that someone else is digusted by. There isn’t a normative standard—including heteronormative-missionary-position-don’t-make-any-noise-and-don’t-like-it-too-much-vanilla-sex. I think God likes loud raucous sex or at least sex that all included parties enjoy.

My shit stinks and so does yours. You and your relationships with others set the standards, believe in yourself and believe in them—take faith in the God that creates in the wake of the god who has been destroyed.

fear of contamination.

1. Holiness has taken a rather severe turn for the worst: synonymity with antiseptics. Christians think: holiness is purity then they think purity is cleanliness. They presume then that if holiness is cleanliness then sin is dirtiness.

2. Is there anything more contaminated than a fear of dirt or a denial of one’s own dirtiness?

3. I’ll break the suspense for you: we live in a world comprised of dirt, we contribute to the dirt, we are made from dirt.

The only thing dirtier and more contaminated than dirt? Pretending like your clean. Never confuse striving to be clean with cleanliness.

4. Remember we all come from dirt and to dirt we return. Everyone has naturally forgotten the birthing scream and blood with which they entered the world, the pleasure or pain of their moment of conception, the shit their parents went through or refused to go through, no one remembers this when they feel self-righteous. No one remembers that most people piss and shit themselves when they die.

5. Dirt is the new clean.

God is dead!

God is dead. Your morality has killed God. Even God can’t live up to the standards that you set and blindly you think you do. God is dead because she has been slowly stamped out by church politicians (formerly known as preachers), suffocated by the expectations of congregations, and dehumanized by countless defamations—I mean doctrines. God felt guilty and committed suicide for your sins.

Nietzsche says that God is dead, but it isn’t just everyone that has killed God. Christians killed God, and they kill God every day. God’s blood is on their hands, on their lips, in their bowels. Truly Churches are not the sepulchers of God but the beliefs of Christians.

They eat God’s body and drink God’s blood and become constipated by their own insecurities. They are bloated by their own holiness. Christians have become obese with their own self-righteousness.

People starve, people commit suicide, people cry themselves to sleep in despair, people are sleeping on benches but Christians aren’t concerned with these things. They care if their pastor holds them over on a sunday morning or if their pastor goes to short, they care about who’s fucking with who, and God forbid that two same-gendered people are fucking. They are concerned with me saying ‘fucking’ but their mercy is unmoved by grief, isolation, separation, and the relational hell people suffer through every day.

It was Jesus who wrote  in the sand, but Christians who built bomb shelters, held witch hunts, and wage holy war.

To you who are offended, I say ‘God is dead.’ It is you that have constricted God, God is a casualty of your holiness.

To those who are curious, those who resonate outside of Christendom, to those of you who are uncertain about your beliefs I say God is alive, and the kingdom of heaven hides amongst you, like a flickering candle, guard it, keep it from the foul breath of  certainty and the self-righteousness that comes with it.