Christianity

“Revising the Ten Commandments – Part 3 – Additions and Final Copy” – The Rabyd Skald

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Mani’s Day

Now for the part of this where I ask the question about ‘is there something else that could be added?’ What stands outside the commandments as edited by myself that should also be on par with the other ten.  In this regard, most people don’t realize the original ten commandments does the same thing. In one place after the ten, more are listed and it has a lot to do with additions or other ideas that need to be addressed. I think that there is a call for me to do this as well.  Some other things should be emphasized.

Additions:

#11 – Until a child can make decisions for themselves, they should not have parts of their body removed, be abused or otherwise manipulated to further the agenda of adults. 

Sorry, I think children should be protected and make such decisions about circumcision, sexuality, and other religious and political matters when they are old enough themselves.  Adults should respect it is their body and their choices and until they can make informed decisions they should be protected until they can do so themselves.

#12 – In case it wasn’t already clear, the following activities should not be done as they are morally bankrupt: rape, genocide, and slavery.

I don’t really need to say anything here do I.  Other than I have just contradicted many of the commands of the Law of Moses and the ‘history’ of the Biblical Story of god’s people to say so.  Christopher Hitchens is right.  The reason these are not in the original ten is that God’s people will be asked to commit genocide and will later both enslave and rape the survivors.

#13 – Don’t do to others, what you would not want to be done to you.

Kind of a catch-all and a negative version of the golden rule.  This is because the negative so it actually prevents bad behavior in this case.

Final Copy: The Grey Wayfarer’s 13 Commandments:

#1 – You were born free.  People will try to enslave you through many means; Don’t let them. Respect the freedom of others; Don’t enslave them. 

#2 – Be an artistic human.  Express yourself and enjoy the expression of others.

#3 – Uphold the truth and be truthful with your words.  When you’re wrong – admit it. 

#4 – Take one day a week off and do what you want to do.  Life is too short not to enjoy it.

#5 – If you have children, remember that was your decision, not theirs; so be responsible parents, earn their respect, and teach them to be good human beings.

#6 – Don’t Murder

# 7 – Engage in responsible and consensual sexual activity.

# 8 – Don’t Steal

# 9 – Don’t lie to convict or harm the innocent.

#10 – Think Freely.  Never accept any tyranny, especially that of the mind.

#11 – Until a child can make decisions for themselves, they should not have parts of their body removed, be abused or otherwise manipulated to further the agenda of adults. 

#12 – In case it wasn’t already clear, the following activities should not be done as they are morally bankrupt: rape, genocide, and slavery.

#13 – Don’t do to others, what you would not want to be done to you.

They still need refining, but a definite improvement.  In the end, I think I have demonstrated that it does not require religion to come up with a solid moral code.  Rather, it seems that one simply being human can actually come up with something better than the supposed ten commandments of God through Moses.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Revising the Ten Commandments – Part 1 – What Needs to Go” – The Rabyd Skald

/ Ed Raby Sr / 1 Comment

Happy Sif’s Day

Well, we are coming to the end of the first year of The Grey Wayfarer and I thought I would do some things that are special for the final few days.  One thing I have been doing in my spare time is looking at videos of people revising the ten commandments from George Carlin to Atheists like Christopher Hitchens.  I have been thinking as my last public hurrah with being critical of Christianity (I am writing a book for publication on this, so from now on when I am a critic of my former faith, I expect to get paid for it), I should do the same. This will be in three parts:

Part 1 – What Needs to Go

Part 2 –  Positive Replacements

Part 3 –  Further Additions and Final Copy

The Ten Commandments are found in several places.  But I like Deuteronomy 5 the best:

# 1 – ‘I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.

Well except this would have been a perfect time to abolish slavery in the whole of Israel as a testimony to its evil. It would have been symbolic of deliverance for the whole nation to be entirely free with no slavery at all. That does not happen as later commandments basically reaffirm slavery as legit and God’s people over and over to be slaves and bondslaves.  Bondslavery being condoned as a form of slavery where a person has Stockholm Syndrome so bad they wilfully become a lifelong slave.

In addition, this seems to be god trying to make people worship him instead of showing he is the only god and worthy of respect. It seems egotistical on god’s part and it is. More likely was written by a man who wanted his reign not to be questioned so he basically creates a God that is unassailable then says his reign it divinely appointed.  Yeah. goodbye.

#2 – You shall not make for yourself an idol or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, and on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.

  1. This pretty much the most ignored command in all of the ten.  I mean go to any Catholic church.  But it goes much further than that – no creativity is allowed here which pretty much gets rid of creative thinkers.  Great way to keep people dumb and compliant.
  2. God is jealous but later calls jealousy a sin. No contradiction there.  Yeah, right.
  3. How is it just to punish children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren for crimes their parents committed. Talk about being a bully.  No standard of justice that is just would do this.  There is also no reverse promise that if one generation is faithful, then the children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren would be blessed.

Goodbye.

#3 – ‘You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not [j]leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.

I have literally heard hundreds of interpretations of what this means. and none of them makes sense.  Of the commandments, it is the most nonsensical and controversial as far as meaning. Goodbye.

#4 – ‘Observe the sabbath day to keep it holy, as the Lord your God commanded you. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servant or your female servant or your ox or your donkey or any of your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you, so that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you. You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out of there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the Lord your God commanded you to observe the sabbath day.

Sounds good on the surface until you read the whole of all the sabbath laws and realize this is more about draconian totalitarian control than rest. One guy is literally killed for gathering sticks on the Sabbath. How is that eye for an eye? More like a scratch being punished by a stick to the eye. Interestingly enough Jesus does contradict this command and it is the only one the disciples and Jesus break even though he tells everyone that not one jot or tittle will pass from the law. Due to conflicting observation and overkill in punishment – Goodbye

#5 – ‘Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord your God has commanded you, that your days may be prolonged and that it may go well with you on the land which the Lord your God gives you.

You have to ask yourself if the man who wrote this had an ironic tone as the punishment, for being a rebellious kid, was death, and it would be your parents that killed you  ‘Days might be prolonged’ indeed. Talk about training for someone to be an abject slave to their rulers, you don’t get better than this.  The potential for abuse is strong in this one as I have seen it firsthand.

If a parent wants honor they should earn it by being a good parent and quite frankly not demand it because of position but earn it by their character. You chose to have children so you are responsible for them.  You shouldn’t have them simply to have servants.  Goodbye.

#6 – ‘You shall not murder. 

Finally, one we can keep. But every law code has this idea and quite frankly it seems to be what we would call – ‘Duh’. I am glad it doesn’t stop all killing as perhaps someday a just war will be fought and self-defense should have killing allowed.

#7 – ‘You shall not commit adultery.

I am going to say what a lot of other commentators say on this one.  There wasn’t something you could have put here that was a more significant issue?  Like, say you should not have a slave or another bigger issue.

The punishment is pretty severe here too – death.  From painful experience, I can say adultery has its own consequences that are quite sufficient. Another case of “How is this eye for an eye?”  Goodbye.

# 8 – ‘You shall not steal.

Another one that is quite frankly – Duh and no real revelation. Law codes older than this one has this in it.  Plagiarism at its finest.

# 9 – You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

Somewhat ahead of its time but not completely as it seems we have another ‘duh’ command here.  Lying to get an innocent person in trouble seems to be self evidently wrong.  Funny how the three I have kept either don’t require a divine entity to tell you them because it is obvious they are good, or that they seem to be in other law codes before this one already.

#10 – ‘You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, and you shall not desire your neighbor’s house, his field or his male servant or his female servant, his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.’

What could be more Orwellian and totalitarian than thought crimes?  The second commandment makes you give up creative thought and this one makes you give up thoughts of any kind of desire.  Making you content with your lot in life even though it sucks.

It is also misogynist as fuck.  ‘Wives as possessions’ is so hot in the bible and the Law of Moses in particular. Property, not people – women equal to cattle is implied.  Goodbye.

We have THREE Survivors:

‘You shall not murder.

‘You shall not steal.

‘You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

So the ones with the moral equivalent of ” Duh, No Shit.” made it.

Hmm.  Need to replace seven of these bad boys. In Part Two we will do that.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Werewolf” – Rogue Wizard: The Fire of Fury – Part 14

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Thor’s Day

Rogue Wizard’s Journal September 4th, 2019

A lot has happened this last week, but the events of today prompt me to turn to my journal here for encapsulating the big picture a little better. In summary form, we were attacked today by a werewolf.  Both Amber and I were bitten in the struggle.  No biggie for me as I am immune due to Mrs. W’s magic from a long time ago.  I have antibodies of a magical kind against lycanthropy.

Amber is a different story. I am a little distraught as Amber is starting to be someone who is important to me and some I am starting to love.  The bite for her could end up being full-blown lycanthropy.  If that happens our already complicated situation will get even more complicated.

After the skinny dipping discussion, which I relayed the last time, our lives had settled into a routine. This last week we only broke that to head into town again together.  We stocked up on food again, this time taking all three of our empty backpacks and each of us ended up carrying a couple bags in each hand.  This time we were seen by a couple more people which made me a little nervous.  I mean how many magical types do you think would be attracted to the relative seclusion of the wilderness of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan?  We got home and put everything away.

If one wonders where we get the resources and money, remember Lunette’s family is an old one and that both Amber and I have access to magical means.  I mean technically, Lunette could make blank pieces of paper look like money, but it is really not necessary. In my case, House Venus gave me a lot of money and set up a very secure and secret account.  It’s not the money for us, it is accessing it without the wrong people noticing.

After that, we settled into a very domestic routine.  I am up before the girls so I make breakfast after doing a little meditation, stretching and writing. The smell of food brings them to life and then we spend the morning each doing our own thing. I study, Lunette does some alchemy and Amber does a lot of practicing with the fireplace as far as fine-tuning her fire skills. Lunch is made by Lunette and then we begin the afternoon session of doing things together like reading a book together, playing games (we have Uno, Payday and Monopoly plus a chess, checkers, and backgammon set)  or talking. Amber fixes supper at some point as she is the best cook among us.  Then we begin the evening ritual of heading to the sauna and taking a bath, then doing a little skinny dipping. At the end of the day, we are on the couch in front of the fireplace.

This last week has had one noticeable change.  Before Amber and I would often wear t-shirts and underwear as a gesture of modesty toward each other.  Lunette, of course, being pixie had no problem being her nudist self right from the beginning. But now that things are out in the open, nudism for all of us seems more the order of the day from start to finish.  There have been some weather issues where this has been discarded briefly, but for the most part, we eat, work, play, bathe and relax in the buff now.

My relationship with Amber, as mentioned before had gone up a bit in the realm of romance and love. A couple nights ago when skinny dipping I was watching her and then as we were getting ready to walking back, I gave my traditional kiss to Lunette and then without thinking I kissed Amber with the same intensity.  She smiled afterward and then kissed me back again. I have to say walking naked in the woods with your arm around the waist of two women is a wonderful experience.

I haven’t had sex with her yet, but I don’t think that is her being resistant – it is me still coming to terms with this whole relationship situation.  Of course, tonight’s events have changed things significantly for the worse.

Tonight the ritual was interrupted during the skinny dipping stage by a savage growl.  For my part, my shield went up around all three of us but it was a little late and the werewolf got inside. His jaws clamped around my right arm so my flame didn’t get a chance. She was fast.  Yes, the werewolf was a she, I got a good look at her and it only takes basic anatomy to figure it out.  I dropped my shield and using my left hand I used a burning hands on the werewolf and it howled falling back. I fell back into the water and was disoriented.

Amber at this point was full-on fire girl and the werewolf snapped at the flames but then launched itself at Amber and got its jaws on her shoulder and slashed her backward with its claws. Amber fell in heap near the shore.  At this point, Lunette saved the day doing her shrink down and energy pinball thing. She was hitting the werewolf so fast and continuously it finally turned tail and ran. We were not the easy prey it was expecting.  By this time I was back in the game and sent a fireball after it when it struck the howl that filled the forest was defining and then the werewolf collapsed burning.  It was dead in seconds, and then I turned my attention to Amber.

She had slash marks across her belly that looked nasty but hadn’t penetrated her insides. The real danger was the bite mark on her shoulder. Lycanthropy is transmitted this way.  She was also unconscious and wasn’t responding to our attempts to wake her. We picked her up and quickly headed to the house. Lunette and I bandaged her wounds and got her into bed.  Eventually, she came back and smiled at both of us.  She said all the wounds hurt, of course, but no bones seemed broken which was a good thing.  We ordered her to get some rest.

Lunette and I know the stakes here.  We have been here before but Mrs. W died a couple years ago and her cure of lycanthropy was lost with her.  Lunette and I also know werewolves run in packs and are not going to take kindly to one of their own being killed. Without intending to we might have angered a whole pack of werewolves and that is not good. Amber right now is sleeping comfortably, but if she starts having night terrors and sweating a lot and is feverish, those are the first signs of lycanthropy. Lunette I can tell is very worried and I am too.

Right now all we can do is watch Amber and stay vigilant.

Writer’s Notes:

I made the remark about this series that it needs to end soon.  Soon in writer terms, and writing one post a week, means it will probably be late November or early December.

From a social point of view, my views on nudism even as a Christina have always been positive even though at the time I was not a practitioner.  Leaving Christianity and faith in God have kind of changed all that in some ways. I have a very open-minded view these days to nudity being simply nudity and not sinful or evil. I also have become a very private practitioner when I am home alone. I find it relaxing.

As for the developing relationship between Edward, Lunette, and Amber. I can’t really see a problem with it as sin and evil in relationships don’t really exist anymore for me. I think if people can love one another, use some reasonable precautions, avoid jealousy and figure out a way to live in such polyamory style relationships, that is great and it is their business, not mine. Whether it would be something for me is I suppose a question, but a lot would have to change for me right now for it to even be a question that affects my real life. Theoretically, I would be open to it.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“My Spiritual Symbolism: Valknut with Rune Circle” – Odin’s Eye

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

 

Happy Woden’s (Odin’s) Day.    

Discussion:

My struggles with magic aside, I do believe in the power of symbols. Not magical power per se but more of a power to encapsulate thoughts, concepts, and ideas into a single pattern or image.  For me, these become very powerful focuses that keep me steady in my thoughts and philosophy.  They also remind me of what is spiritually important.

I adopted the valknut as my replacement for the cross right after leaving Christianity.  I had become fairly certain that at least the Nine Noble Virtues of Asatru were going to be my new moral code, so I looked for something to symbolize that and the symbol of the Valknut was almost always present in any website I was studying at the time and so made it my own.  The fact that it is connected with Odin and death rituals (burial) only solidified this.  The Grey Wayfarer (me) often wears a pendant of the valknut around his neck on a chain.  Mine also has a circle of runes around it like in the picture above.

Both the valknut and the runes are mysteries as to their full meaning.  Much has been lost thanks to the invasion of Christianity and the subsequent purge that followed them of all things pagan. The valknut and runes apparently were too pagan to find their way to being incorporated into Christian worship and so were actually expunged.  A few examples survive and so what we know is very little.  The valknut is associated with Odin and burial because we find them on gravestones.  Runes are everywhere but they don’t seem to be about language although some modern pagans have made it so.  From a scholar’s point of view, they are largely a mystery as well.

What this meant for me is that I was left to give this symbol and the runes around it their own meaning. So…

Time to Look Through the Eye:

“To see the truth, change one eye for another”

Faith:

I am a deistic humanistic pagan.  First and foremost I fall on the side that says while religions are bunk and made up for the most part, I don’t dismiss the idea of a supreme being, beings or force of the universe being a real possibility. However, I believe that the only real source of overcoming my own and other human problems is myself and other humans. I am pagan because my spirituality basically draws me back to the spiritual roots of my ancestors. It is far more about heritage than religion for me.  The valknut and runes are a good symbol of that as both call to my Germanic and (hopefully) Scandinavian roots.  It is at least the faith and spirituality of my own spirit regardless of biological genetics.

Meditation:

I suppose my meditation times that I have used the valknut and rune circle are the ones that have given both new meanings for me. Firstly the nine sides of the three triangles became representative of the Nine Noble Virtues.  Later, the nine formed the three triangles of the Higher Virtues of love, Justice, and Wisdom.  All of them are interlocked and the three triangles, if you look closely, cannot be separated fro meach other.  It thus forms a single spiritual path of following virtue, a single symbol – the valknut.  It also because of its connection to Odin serves as a reminder of the finality of life. Virtue is the only thing that gives that life value.

The rune circle around it is all 24 known runes. In many ways, it symbolizes the mysteries of the knowledge of the universe to me. By following the path of virtue, I begin to understand these mysteries better.

Theology:

One of those mysteries is the divine.  Part of that, to be honest, is to assess whether such divine entity or entities exist.  As a diest, I fall on the side of agnosticism that says we don’t know enough to dismiss the idea of the divine, so I believe more in its possibility than it is not possible.  I will give the atheists their due in saying they could very well be right, but at the same time, I don’t think I can myself close my mind, heart, and body off to the idea that a creator or creators exist. It seems too ‘dogmatic’ of ‘fundamentalist’ to me so to speak.

The issue then is to find meaning either way – for me, this is the following the path of virtue as a means to coming to better understandings of the world around me and perhaps finding the answers I seek.  I am a pilgrim searching for truth, wherever I find it.  I am the Grey Wayfarer

Spirituality:

I find spirituality in Virtue.  Virtue allows me to connect with myself, other people and the universe and all it contains. How can one not be connected when following after virtue? For me, this symbol reminds me that part of understanding the universe requires connections.  The path is what connects and virtue is the path.  In meditation, this symbol has proven to be the best focus when I am looking to understand this connectivity to everything else.

Conclusion:

As I meditate more on this, I am sure more things will come to mind.  I have plans to make my meditation time more ‘ritualized’ in that I may have other foci and even some candles and incense.  Regardless, the valknut and rune circle will always be central to it. The centerpiece if you will regardless of what becomes my first meditation altar.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Magic – A Skeptical Pagan’s Perspective” – Odin’s Eye

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Woden’s (Odin’s) Day.    

Discussion:

In the Pagan world, magic takes a lot of different forms.  In my pagan world of the Asatru, with its Viking heritage, there is a belief in magic.  It is full of shamanism as well as the simple idea of using consciousness to affect the world through the will of the practitioner.  Because in Norse mythology everything has a spirit, then the issue was influencing the will of those spirits to line up with the will of mage.  Most notably the magic of the Vikings seems to have focused on the idea of knowing and fate.  For one to decern the fate of a person and thus decided the best course of action was the goal of Viking magic.  This particular form of magic was called seidr.  The Vikings had other forms but this seems to have been their magical passion if you will.

I freely confess, pagan that I am, I am skeptical of magic.  It stems from seeing the value in science, but as some of the writings on magic point out, the end goals and means of science and magic are very different.  I can get that, so I am not closed off to the possibility of magic.  My problem is my own personal history as a Pentecostal Christian has soured me to the whole idea as what many times was considered ‘miracles’ was either very explainable as mass manipulation and psychology or straight up huckster fraud.  The idea of the divine powers reaching into the lives of people I can accept, I just think that the people who claim to do this need to be scrutinized with a very skeptical eye.

So what about magic in the real world?

Time to Look Through the Eye:

“To see the truth, change one eye for another”

Faith:

I can believe that the powers that might be would interact with the rest fo us humans. The question I have is whether this is necessary all the time. If in some ways this might be presumptuous on our part to even ask for it.  I start the Pagan Pulpit out with the following paragraph:

We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods, goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.

I want to tell you I sincerely mean this. I am not going to presume on any friendship and that includes the divine powers. Faith that they exist – yes.  Presuming that they want to help me – no.

Meditation:

As I have meditated on this question of magic. my biggest personal struggle is that of prayer.  Mostly, as I look at Chrisitan prayer, I see it is talking to one’s self and interestingly enough part fo the self that we actually define as God.  You will find that Christians in general view this ‘God’ very differently.  Everyone has their own very unique perspective on who this person is and interestingly enough shaped in each persons own image of what they want.

Prayer to me seems presumptuous in and of itself.  But self-talk I see the need for as we all do it and those that pay attention to it often are more well adjusted. The real question I suppose is theological.

Theology:

Theologically speaking, the question comes back for me as to whether the powers are benevolent, malevolent or indifferent to the whole question of good and evil. Why would they help us if we ask? Can they be trusted?

Even in the mythologies, I know those are good questions.  Odin, for instance, has a higher purpose in mind and so will not hesitate to sacrifice you his devotee to that cause.   Loki certainly can’t be trusted.  Better not to pray at all and thus leave the whole magic of life to living as virtuous as possible for your own sake. Virtue has its own form of magic as do stories.

Spirituality:

My spiritual side longs for what magic could do, but my skeptical side says better to leave it alone. To practice the more subtle magic of living life as a follower of the Nine Noble Virtues and to tell tales as a Skald.  Bring the more common magic of virtue and story to people.  To not presume on the powers that be, but rather be self-reliant and work hard to attain that I wish.  Magic seems like a dangerous short cut.

Conclusion:

I guess I can leave my fellow pagans with some questions.  Is magic something you practice and why do you do it? Is my skepticism a good thing or a bad one?

For now, I will follow virtue and tell stories of life and the universe. It seems to be a safe path. I still don’t see a good reason to take the short cut of magic.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Objections to Christianity – The Justice of the Biblical God – An Unbalanced Scale” – Part 4 – (Revised August 2019) – Odin’s Eye – Theological Objections to Christianity

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Thor’s Day.  

August 2019 Revision Notes:

It has been almost a year since I wrote these originally starting in November of 2018.  When I got to the rotation in Odin’s Eye the last time where I was going to deal with these objections again, I saw no need for revision but rather simply laid it out there that no one had responded to them to that date and moved on into the rest of the Rotation for Odin’s Eye. 

This time though I feel that I need to spend four weeks of Odin’s Eye doing some revisions that will either clarify my position, add some other thoughts or edit for other issues.  Such edits will be marked by italics.  When archived, they will appear under the original post on this Page: My Four Theological Objections to Christianity

 Mostly though this is a cut and paste with some revisions. As the series goes on there will be more revisions as I can see the need for things to change a bit in the other three objections.

In part four, I felt the need to add a few paragraphs for hopefully a clearer explanation. But also there are some additional arguments that trouble me about the whole afterlife thing with Christianity. I also completely rewrote my conclusions. 

Introduction:

I am wrapping up my four main theological objections to Christianity with the simple but profound fact that the god of the Bible is very suspect in as far as whether or not he is just and acts with justice. I would go so far to say that the god of the Bible does not follow his own clearly stated guidelines for justice – 1) “Eye for eye, tooth for a tooth” and 2) Restitution Included. Namely that the punishment should fit the crime and that restitution when merited should be offered.  This is the standard of justice found in the Torah or Law of Moses. Jesus of Nazareth takes this on in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7 pointing out that the principles of justice were still valid and in fact because things should be done for the love of God, they were even more challenging.  God expects Christians to still be just and follow his principles of justice. The issue is: does the god of the Bible follow his own rules.  I would say not.

Faith:

From a standpoint of my own faith, the biblical god’s justice, and in particular the doctrine of Hell, has always been a problem.  My standard answer throughout my days as a pastor to others that asked was that the justice of God was a mystery.  That someday, we would know it all and see that this god was just to send people to hell.  Even if they were people who we loved and who this god claimed to love. But it was more than that as some of the stories of god executing justice were a little lacking justice themselves.

Job’s trial is a good example where God allows the Devil to kill all of Job’s children and servants save a few and does it simply to test Job to see if he will remain faithful.  The Biblical god’s answer of – “I am god, that’s why.” is a little lacking in reasoning for a supreme being for one and the whole situation is lacking in compassion not just for Job but for all the people slain for another.  They all lived and died simply to satisfy a bet between the Devil and the almighty is a little much to reconcile with the idea of God is love.  Stuff like this definitely tests your faith and it should.

Religion:

The thing is most religious responses to the justice of God dilemma is either to cite ‘mystery’ (read – I don’t have a  reasonable answer, so I am going to punt) or our ignorance.  Simply put they both attempt to give a god a different standard of justice than we follow.  How convenient, but also telling that we cannot even use the standard of justice of ‘eye for an eye’ with the biblical god. The very standard that this god gives, he does not follow.

The fact that I used to come up with this double standard for god myself bothered me for years when I realized that is what I was doing.  A standard of justice is only viable if it is evenly applied to all.  It should be logical and consistent enough that it CAN be applied to all without exception. We have learned not to tolerate double standards between those that lead and those that follow, so why here?  Why does this god of the Bible get a free pass for being hypocritical?

Religion does its damnedest to keep us from seeing this, and it does it by trying to make God so high his different standard of justice is justified.  It sounds like a ruling religious class seeking to justify why they can impose rules on others that they don’t have to follow themselves.  After all, they are ‘men of God’ and so as Cardinal Richelieu points out in the Three Musketeers movie in 1993 – “The Cardinal is not subject to the laws of men”.  Easy to justify if you create a different standard of justice for your god and you then say you are subject to that standard, not the standard of men.

Theology:

But the Biblical God fails theologically and it comes out best in the doctrine of Hell and final judgment.  Everything we will do is in a short temporal time of existence but everything about the final judgment of the god of the Bible is eternal.  In short, this god is going to punish us in a way that is eternal and permanent for our behavior in temporal and non-permanent existence.  This includes annihilation and eternal punishment views.  The only thing that might save Christianity here as far as theology is actually the idea of purgatory where the punishment is redemptive and non-permanent.  But even here there is a postulate that punishment can last centuries compared to the shortness of life.

So being burned like the rich man is said to be burned is somehow eye for eye and tooth for a tooth?  In that story, the rich man is burned not because he defied god but because he had a good life and Lazarus was rewarded because he had suffered in life.  Go look at the story (Luke 16) yourself, this is the rationale that is given.  So because a guy had it good he is punished with burning fire?  How is this eye for an eye? Justice would have been to have the two trade places for a second life, not that he is burned for a long time.

There is little justice in this story, just a god who on the one hand in the Old Testament tells people who prosperity is a sign of God’s blessing and then turning around and saying though that if you do become prosperous, the biblical God is going to burn you as punishment for it.  In a full analysis of the biblical account not only are there many accounts where god’s justice is a little suspect but where he violates the very rules he sets forward because he gets jealous or angry. Like the other mythologies, the biblical god is very human and reflects probably more of the attitude of the author of that particular passage than the almighty that actually might exist.

More troubling to me recently in August of 2019 is the fact that no theology of damnation other than purgatory by the Catholics, and even then it only works for Catholics, allows people who gain heaven to appeal for those that they love in Hell for God to be merciful.  I have to ask what kind of compassion anyone has that would allow their loved one to burn for all eternity?  I mean if someone I love like my children or grandparents were in the eternal lake of fire and I knew this, I would have enough compassion on them to be in front of God every single moment of eternity begging for his mercy for them. How can you even say you have a compassionate heart if you believe that your fellow human beings are going to be burned forever and ‘that’s just the way it is.”

But that brings up a question of God’s mercy.  Could you burn one of your children, parents, friends, etc. with fire forever simply because they violated your rules or didn’t believe something you told them?  For me, that is definitely a ‘no’.  My love for them far exceeds my desire for them to be under my control and doing things as I wish or that they absolutely believe me.  If that is true for me, why is God then an unmerciful bastard about this? How is it that he the God that IS Love, has less compassion for some of his children than me? Perhaps because he is a concoction of men who were in power that desired to control through fear? Yeah, I would bet that is it. 

Spirituality:

See the source image

For me personally, I come back to the quote I have used before.  If the god or gods are just then they will judge us based on the virtues we lived by.  If they are not just, then they do not deserve to be served.  If there are no gods then, we should live in such a way as to be fondly remembered. I worry less about an afterlife; because regardless, it is this life I must live either way.  I choose to live based on virtue because, in the end, it is all I really have.  My own personal responsibility for the life I live is mine alone. Cue Robert Heinlein.

See the source image

Conclusion:

I will revisit these objections in the future with other thoughts.  For now, if anything, these objections have gotten stronger and more detailed and still form a bedrock of why I think not only is Christianity a bad Idea, but I am now convinced it is largely a fraud. I would also contend that it has been used, much like Islam and Judaism as well, to deceive, control and manipulate others. 

The most troubling thing to me is I know many Chrisitan friends and former friends have read these and you know what?  Crickets. Silence. My eternal fate is not so important that they would even try to answer.  Perhaps the real truth is that these objections have no answer and the basically constitute the god Yahweh to the rest of mythology and as another concoction of men and his flaws simply are a reflection of their thoughts about him being flawed. Because they had flawed standards of justice and ulterior motives, the God they created’s execution of justice reflects this. 

It also speaks to the real beliefs of Christians.  I know for a fact, that many do not actually believe. I was minister for 20 years and I lost track of the number of people in my churches who when questioned, basically had done one of the following: 1) They had picked and chosen what parts of Chrisitan doctrine or the Bible they liked and discarded the rest.  2) They didn’t really actually believe anything, they just went along with it for the community and to keep family happy. When questioned further, it all came back to one of what I call my four objections in some form as to why they didn’t believe or what they had chosen to discard.  It for all of them had basically become tradition, not real faith or spirituality. 

This to me now is the most damaging thing – why have spirituality in your life that is not genuine?  Why do you have a part of your life basically be a fraud? Would it not be better to be truly honest with yourself about where you are spiritually speaking?  It is my four objections that started me on the path to honest spiritual reflection and being truly who I am.  I am now better for it and a better person in many respects.  Mostly, I have stopped being a liar.  This is the first real step down the path to finding truth.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Objections to Christianity – Part 3 – The Cross and Empty Tomb – An Imaginary Solution to an Imaginary Problem”(Revised August 2019) – Odin’s Eye

/ Ed Raby Sr / 2 Comments

 

Happy Thor’s Day

August 2019 Revision Notes:

It has been almost a year since I wrote these originally starting in November of 2018.  When I got to the rotation in Odin’s Eye the last time where I was going to deal with these objections again, I saw no need for revision but rather simply laid it out there that no one had responded to them to that date and moved on into the rest of the Rotation for Odin’s Eye. 

This time though I feel that I need to spend four weeks of Odin’s Eye doing some revisions that will either clarify my position, add some other thoughts or edit for other issues.  Such edits will be marked by italics.  When archived, they will appear under the original post on this Page: My Four Theological Objections to Christianity

 Mostly though this is a cut and paste with some revisions. As the series goes on there will be more revisions as I can see the need for things to change a bit in the other three objections. In part three, I felt the need to add a few paragraphs for hopefully a clearer explanation. 

Introduction:

I know I will probably get a reaction out of this one and I am not trying to be provocative.  I am simply trying to get people to see the logical problems of Salvation through Christ.  Once you dismiss sin as a made-up concept, you could say that it is really unnecessary to go after ‘God’s’ solution to the problem, but the whole of Christianity revolves around Christ’s work on the cross and the resurrection to save people from sin and from eternal damnation. You might say it is the core doctrine no matter what flavor of Christianity you live by so it deserves some attention.

For the sake of argument, let’s concede sin is real. Then does the solution the Bible presents God has for it make any sense? 

Faith:

Of course, the first thing that can be said is each flavor of Christianity stakes out is how said salvation is achieved with Christ.  The faith versus works controversy starts right away in the first century. James and Paul go at it right in the Bible.  Now I heard multiple explanations from both Protestants and Catholics of why James and Paul are not arguing about the same thing really but they practically quote each other with only one variation.  One says salvation in Christ cannot be of works so no one can boast, and the other one says that without works it is impossible to show faith. No matter how you logically try to get them to be ‘defending the same salvation only from different directions”; it is contradictory.  One is saying that works have nothing to do with salvation, and the other is saying it does.

So what this really shows is that even in the Bible and among early Christians, they had disputes and disagreements about how this works and thus it points to the Bible not being inspired by God, so much as it records those early debates among the faithful about how salvation worked.  That makes the Bible very human and also not the Word of God because if God had actually wanted to tell us how this works; because it seems it would be the most important thing for us to know, he would have made it plain, straightforward and quite frankly non-contradictory.

Religion:

Of course, every flavor of Christianity goes even further with specifics and added on things to the doctrine of salvation in Christ.  The Catholic Church plain out tells you that you can only be saved from death through them and no one else.  Many Protestant denominations will tell you the same.  My former denomination would tell people that they had the whole gospel, not just part of it.  Salvation is complicated by religion because religion seeks to use these ideas to keep people grateful and faithful for telling those people their version of ‘the truth’.

In the end, I would say that each variation of salvation through Christ is presented in a way that helps the group presenting it.  It is done to layout their other doctrinal tenants so their way of thinking about God is central to it all, and thus gives a theological force to everything they believe. Of course, this gives religion the guilt and punishment/reward options it needs to manipulate people. 

Theology:

Religion aside though, my objections are theological – what kind of God do we have, who claims to be merciful and loving, but demands for his followers to be forgiving without condition, but doesn’t do so himself?  It also brings up the question of the ability to forgive in that we are expected to forgive each other without condition because we can, even as sinners. Yet, a holy God can’t simply forgive without sacrificing his only begotten son in one of the cruelest ways ever devised by man.  He must have this sacrifice or he cannot forgive at all, and I must have faith in it and the resurrection or he will not forgive me specifically.  Worse yet if I don’t forgive others as a Christian, he won’t forgive me. He can choose to not forgive others and still be a holy God, but if I don’t forgive, I cannot be saved?  So I, as a ‘sinner’, have not only a greater expectation than my creator; but also I am more capable because I can do this forgiveness without conditions, but he cannot?

This bit of ‘logic’ pales in comparison to the fact that in order to forgive us he must sacrifice himself to himself, to appease himself to save us from himself. See the problem? Well Ed, what if then the whole doctrine of salvation as it currently stands is man-made and that isn’t the real doctrine of salvation God wanted? How then would we ever know the real one? It seems a little too confusing for something so important as eternal life.  My response that the current one is man-made? – exactly, and that is probably true from the start of Christianity to where it actually stands today.   It seems to me that this idea is just as man-made because a supreme being could have come up with the simple plan to just forgive people. As Jesus is praying in the garden “if it is possible, let this cup pass from me” we would see the opening up the heavens and God saying -“You know what, I have a better plan – let’s just forgive people like I expect them to forgive each other.” That would be just, logical and consistent.

There is also another theological side issue – How much of a sacrifice is it really for Jesus if he knows for certain (which he indicates three times in the gospels) that he will rise from the dead?  Honestly, if he knew that and most people who have faith believe he did and the text certainly seems to indicate he did, then it isn’t that big of a sacrifice? He knows he is not going to ultimately be dead in the end; so why not do it, as there is no ultimate risk to him?  In the end, Jesus is risking nothing himself as God, just going through the inconvenience of temporal suffering.  Why? To make a point? What point would that be, when there is nothing actually sacrificed in the end? He lives and knows he is going to live so why the anguish?

Spirituality:

I guess this leaves me with the question from a spiritual point of view as to what salvation is? Or does it?  I mean, if there is no such thing as sin, there is no need to be saved from it. Of course, then I could be left with the question of what the real divine reality might expect from me?  I guess the only thing then is to live a good life regardless of what that divine reality might be. Marcus Aurelius rightly observes, in my opinion, this in his famous quote on the good life.

See the source image

Of course, you are kind of left to things yourself as to define what virtues you will live by to attain that good life. In short, what is defined as a good life is left to you.

Conclusion:

The implications of losing the whole notion of sin and a need for salvation have been very liberating. There is no guilt or shame in my heart or mind at all these days.  I do try every day to be a better man than I was the day before. This, I have found is a far better way to live. 

Better yet, is discarding the notion of a loving God who also sends people he loves to hell.  Because the god of the Bible seems to have some major issues with justice, but that is the subject of the next post.  

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Freya’s Chambers: Introduction and Opening Thoughts” – Freya’s Chambers

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Mani’s Day

Disclaimer:  The topics covered in Freya’s Chambers include serious discussions of sex, sexuality and related issues.  If it isn’t your thing; you can move along, otherwise enjoy and feel free to discuss.

Opening Remarks: 

In today’s modern world, sexuality is a difficult topic, to say the least.  The issue of gender and identity ignites more heat than light and I am not sure that today I am going to help with that.  That’s not the point for me in this post anyway, but more to get a grasp on my own thoughts on the subject by introducing a running discussion. I also want to introduce to you a new topic area which, in keeping with the Norse theme of the blog, I have titled simply “Freya’s Chambers”. Freya is the Norse goddess of war, love, sex, and fertility. It will have its own page and will appear periodically whenever the yen strikes me to write on subjects relating to sexuality in pagan thought.

I need also to point out at the beginning that these are my thoughts on the subject and don’t necessarily represent all pagans, deists or humanists.  In fact, that is part of my motivation for writing on these topics is to sort pagan sexuality out a little because viewpoints on these topics are varied.  The main issue though is that for most pagans, sexuality and spirituality are linked because sexuality is a part of life and living and thus part of the universe that is sacred. Sexuality is as much a spiritual reality as a physical and cultural one. Sacred Sex is a part of the spiritual viewpoint of pagans.

I also have to note that my deism and humanism kick in here as well as the fact I don’t dismiss the findings of biology, psychology or science in general when it comes to talking about gender, sex or sexuality.  I try very much to realize that we do have some scientific findings on the subject that presents both facts and truth in these areas.  I also realize that there is much that is not understood, and this dwells in the realm of spirituality and theory and these also factor in for discussion.

One final note, I was very well known as a Chrisitan blogger who wrote extensively on what the Bible says about sex, nudity, sexuality, and gender.  I have to warn you that my departure from Christianity has changed a lot of my viewpoints.  I have no appeal to authority anymore when it regards these topics.  Mostly I rely on my reason and experience on the deist/humanist side and my intuition and wisdom for the pagan side.  Some might comment at this time that it looks like I am trying to archive male-female balance in my viewpoint.  I am not sure about that but one thing is for sure, that you will see a massive viewpoint shift in these topics compared to what I used to write as a Christian.

So what will be some of the topics in Freya’s Chambers?  Well, sex and sexuality are broad topics to be sure, but below is a shortlist and a little discussion of where I am currently on some topics as examples.  This is not an exhaustive list of course, but I think it will give you a good idea of what you might encounter when you see the suffix heading “Freya’s Chambers”.

Sexual Identity: 

See the source image

I am going to say that if I take science into account, this whole discussion of gender identity for me kind of crystalizes into a few indisputable facts: 1) If you have a penis you are male, 2) If you have a vagina you are a female and 3) males and females are different.  Even pagans have ingrained in there viewpoint the idea of feminine and masculine spiritual forces.  It is part of the mythologies, part of the spiritual viewpoint.

For me, it is also a question of acceptance of self.  You don’t find spiritual peace by trying to be something you are not. Part of achieving spiritual peace is embracing who are and part of that is accepting that you are a man or a woman. There are exceptions to this dichotomy, even genetics tells us that, but such exceptions are rare and not the statistical norm.  The vast majority of us are male or female and that is not just physical but also sociological and psychological

Note this is about identity for me, not orientation.  Personally whether or nor someone’s sexual orientation is a choice or ingrained in who they are is irrelevant to me.  It matters little to me as a deistic humanist pagan, and as a libertarian, who someone has sex with as long as it is mutually consensual. Their business, not mine. I trust that each person can make those choices for themselves, and I am not qualified in any way to judge them right or wrong in their choice.

Nudity and Nudism:

See the source image

Leaving Christianity has allowed me to basically discard the whole tightrope walk of trying to look at nudity and where you fall into sin. Sin is gone in my thinking, so nudity is now looked at as purely as rational and pagan issues.  Things are actually quite free and open now for me on this topic.  Most pagans don’t have a view of nudity as wrong, just sometimes culturally unacceptable by others and in certain contexts. The human body is a beautiful thing and the naked human form should not automatically be seen as sexualized.

Don’t get me wrong there is a sexual side to nudity. To say that seeing a naked human being does not arouse sexual attraction at times is simply to deny reality. But just because a man or woman is naked; it does not follow that they are asking for sex.  Some people learn to distinguish between sexual intent and nudity and some people don’t.  For me the two can be together, but not necessarily.  It really comes down to context. Just because a person is naked, it does not mean that I can look past respecting them as a human being.  I should see their humanity first, then other things and only if it is clear those other things are presented to me.

For me, being an at-home nudist, I have discovered freedom I accepting myself to be very powerful.  I have to also admit, that I sometimes feel far more comfortable in my skin than in clothes. There is also the dual call in my heart, my inner wolves of need and want howling if you will, to shed my clothes both outside and with others. If my self-discovery has grown this much simply at home, I wonder what else could be discovered in other contexts. It is something I wrestle with because of past religious indoctrination and current relationships.

Masculine-Feminine Balance:

There is a reason I am not Wiccan and it was my perception very early on, even as a Christian, that Wiccans are imbalanced as far as gender. There is much emphasis on The Goddess and little else that is masculine.  Hell, their male practitioners argue whether they should be called witches or warlocks.  I just find Wicca to be very feminine and strongly so.  It is why Asatru is my choice because it is much more balanced.

Achieving balance for myself mostly involves making sure I embrace the strength of being a man within my self and the strength of the feminine around me. I get most of the later from the women in my life whose influence can not be understated.  I am very masculine with all that goes with it.  To have feminine perspectives in my life to balance that out is appreciated at all times.

Equality: 

See the source image

The whole ‘God the head of man, man the head of woman’ Christian viewpoint I have discarded like the patriarchal trash it is.  Talk about men writing a book to justify their male dominance over women, and you will not get a better example than the Bible.  I am egalitarian in my orientation and that means I will point out equality in both directions.  However, you also better be able to demonstrate the inequality is real with things like research.  That said, the genders have different strengths in and of themselves, but I don’t feel that one gender should have cultural, legal or social advantages over the other because of them.

For instance, on the one hand, women can rightly say that their roles in society are often forced on them.  There have definitely been some issues as far as to pay, opportunity and the like. On the flip side, the fact that men get longer sentences for the same crime and dower laws still exist requiring a man to take care of his ex after they split, but no such condition exists the other way, is also not equality.  In the United States where I live it has only been recently been challenged that men can be drafted for war but not women.

Going back to nudity above, I side with the ladies in saying if a man can take off his shirt and go bare-chested in certain public places, so should a woman.  On the flip side, the laws are less harsh when it comes to sexual misconduct when a woman exposes her genitals than a man in some states.  My point is that the whole social, cultural and legal world has these inequalities and I fight for their removal but it goes both ways.  It might be summed up in the simple example we need to move from saying: “it is not right to hit or rape a woman” to “it is not right to hit or rape another person”.

Gender Roles:

See the source image

Inequalities aside, genetics, science and such tell me that males and females not only are different right from birth, but they also tend to gravitate to different roles in society naturally. Some of these tests have been interesting as girls would dress up the trucks in dresses and boys would turn the dolls they were given to play with into action figures.  I don’t think we can escape the fact that in society women and men embrace certain roles naturally and some roles are just not possible by one gender or the other. We need to be equals as far as legal and societal rights; but in the end, some things just come naturally to one gender or the other.

I take on the feminists on this issue a lot where, for instance, they complain that there are not a lot of women CEOs.  I point out to them there doesn’t seem to be a lot of women coal miners or sewer workers either. It gets comically interesting when it is revealed that what a feminist considers equality doesn’t involve jobs that are dangerous or dirty most of the time. It is pretty clear that men gravitate toward the dangerous and dirty while women like secure and clean.  It is also clear that on dates, the man is still expected to pay for things, etc.  I think feminists reveal a lot of hypocrisy on this one and even women can see it, which is why many women refuse to identify themselves as feminists.

Sex:

See the source image

If you ask me the one thing that keeps me believing in the spiritual side of life above all others – it’s sex. Sorry, there is more to sex, at least to me, than just fucking.  Perhaps my perspective has been limited by the fact I have only made love physically to only one woman in my life, or perhaps it is why I feel that way.  One thing I do know that more is exchanged between us when we make love than bodily fluids.

I will talk about sex from time to time in a spiritual context. In this, you might also see the idea of sexual attraction as well. Under this topic, you might find other things like the effect technology has had on sex, etc.  I have had a few experiences of a sexual nature outside sexual intercourse with more than one woman along these lines, so there are notes that could be made.

Conclusion and Final Word: 

Throughout you will see me make note of changes from what I thought before as a Christian and now what I think that I am using more of a deistic humanist pagan mindset. I probably will never speak this broadly again and will take one topic at a time from now on. Mostly today I was pretty much shooting from the hip.  New posts in this topic suffix will probably be deeper in thought.  Mostly though there is a lot of changing things in my mindset that I am trying to crystallize and the best way for me to do that is to put them on digital paper.

Welcome to Freya’s Chambers.

I remain,

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Objections to Christianity – Part 2 – Sin: An Imaginary Man-Made Problem” (Revised August 2019) – Odin’s Eye – Theological Objections to Christianity

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Thor’s Day

August 2019 Revision Notes:

It has been almost a year since I wrote these originally starting in November of 2018.  When I got to the rotation in Odin’s Eye the last time where I was going to deal with these objections again, I saw no need for revision but rather simply laid it out there that no one had responded to them to that date and moved on into the rest of the Rotation for Odin’s Eye. 

This time though I feel that I need to spend four weeks of Odin’s Eye doing some revisions that will either clarify my position, add some other thoughts or edit for other issues.  Such edits will be marked by italics.  When archived, they will appear under the original post on this Page: My Four Theological Objections to Christianity

 Mostly though this is a cut and paste with some revisions. As the series goes on there will be more revisions as I can see the need for things to change a bit in the other three objections. In part two, I felt the need to add a few paragraphs for hopefully a clearer explanation. 

Introduction:

My loss of faith really started here.  I can actually go back to a message I was preaching on sin and salvation through Christ and the fact this quote from Dan Barker from Losing Faith in Faith ( a book I still want to read) was rolling around in my head.  I was trying to think of something that would make his assertion wrong.  I got up preached the message and sat down.  I can site this moment as the time my crisis of faith began. I realized he was right.

I realized there is no proof that sin rationally exists.  I only believed that because that was what I was told by a preacher and read it in the Bible.  Unless the Bible was truly inspired, then I had no natural or logical proof that there was this thing called sin, a sinful nature or my actions were righteous or sinful. God Himself had never come down and told me I was a sinner, that was men either in the form of preachers or the men who wrote the Bible.  Over time, I began to realize that sin has the same problem as the inspiration of the Bible – the Bible asserts it but never proves it.

Going back to my pulpit moment, I sat there thinking and my faith started to unravel.  I sat there thinking: “I make a living by telling people they are sinners so they will feel guilty, then they accept the ‘gospel’ and feel better.  Out of gratitude they throw money in the basket and pay me. WTF.”  It was a bad moment for me, and one that led to my eventual downfall over two years later.

Faith:

If you are a believer you take the existence of sin as purely a matter of faith.  Basically, if you believe that sin exists, you do it for the same reasons you believe the Bible is inspired.  You have faith it is true – you hope and believe it is true, but you do not have a proof or a rational argument to say it is true.  The Bible writers assume sin is real and a problem.  They never prove it, and the believer is left to take that sin exists as a reality and that God has solved it.  You believe all that without rational evidence.  It is purely a matter of faith.

Now I want to emphasize that this does not disprove sin’s existence, but it puts on the same plane as believing in a lot of things that we believe exist but have no proof of.  The issue then is should we order our lives on faith in the idea that man is sinful, or go based on our own observations of human nature and conclude that if anything we can have faith in the fact that all human beings are human. 

Religion:

I now think that sin is a man-made concept.  It probably originally. like so many things might have had a good intention.  To keep people from making bad decisions given the cultural context.  I mean sex without birth control and modern medicine can lead to deadly diseases and unwanted pregnancies. So you tell people not to have sex except with people they are committed to and get married to so the child will be legitimate. The practical side of this is the lessened risk of STDs and unwanted pregnancies. It is a wise course of action.

When just showing the wisdom of this to others doesn’t work, you throw in the wrath of God to bring about a more forceful form of persuasion – tell them it’s a sin against God and He will bring down his wrath on the one who sins.  This is where you make up the concept that sexual sin is an affront to God and he will send you to hell if you don’t repent of it and stop doing it.  It is ultimately a fear tactic that uses guilt to prevent certain behaviors.

The dark side of this gets worse though as people genuinely think they’re taking the side of God when the punish sinners.  The real problem with sin is that some people think they have risen above the concept of it.  They feel qualified to judge others using their religious beliefs. It gets worse because the said concept can be held by people in power who wish to impose their views on people to create a ‘righteous society’.  To force others to follow your moral code of some behaviors being sin and thus outlawed. The problem is the difficulty using reason to prove something is a sin.  It’s not self-evident.

Theology:

I don’t believe in sin as a theological concept anymore. I think in large part it is a bad one because all it does is produce guilt and then in a guilt-ridden state people can be manipulated.  I haven’t looked at this fully but I have a theory a large part of religious people have a poor self-concept and that is because they have a large amount of guilt associated with their ‘sins’.  This leads them to think they are bad or even evil people and the cycle of self-destruction begins.  You spend a lot of time putting on masks at that point to protect yourself from the social wrath of being a sinner while at the same time being wracked with guilt because you can’t seem to escape your sin. If it sounds like I have been there – yep.  I would say a lot of my initial causes of depression came from this struggle.  Yes, I am saying that religion, particularly the Christian notion of sin,  may have has a great deal of influence in causing my depressive issues.

My theology about mankind has certainly changed since I discarded man as a sinner.  I don’t think of myself as a sinner but simply a human being. I am not all-powerful, all-knowing or all-present; so I am going to make mistakes and there is really nothing I can do about it. I have needs that are normal.  Wants that are normal.  I have my reason and wisdom to guide me. I am not perfect and I make mistakes and have errors in judgment, but that doesn’t mean I am a sinner, just human. To me, life is no longer about overcoming sin and removing it from my life.  Rather, it is about discovering the virtue in me and causing it to grow. And there is a virtue in who I am as a human being if I look for it and develop it.  It’s about growing into the best human being I can be.

Note: Unlike the atheist, I have not discarded the idea of a spiritual side to mankind at all, but rather I am saying that sin is not something I believe is real about it.  Humanity is more complicated than he is all bad or all good. 

Spirituality:

This is why spiritually speaking I spend more time meditating on the Nine Noble Virtues as a way to learn where I need to grow. I am not trying to get rid of sin out of my life, praying that God is gracious, etc. I have come to see some things as normal and human, not sinful.  My goal now is to build character, not remove sin because I think sin is a made up imaginary concept.  I meditate on the good things, not the bad things.  I grow the good in me, rather than trying to deny my humanity by calling it sinful. I find it makes me much happier and far more at ease in this world.

One good example of this is my changing attitudes about sex and sexual desire. I feel sexual desire is normal in humanity and it is normal to feel a sexual desire toward a lot of different people.  Lust is made up to me unless you are using the term to describe passionate sexual desire which is neither good nor bad. What might be a factor in sexual desires is wisdom and reason saying that not all sexual interaction is beneficial. Some of it could be detrimental.  The real issue is that sex in and of itself is not sinful in any form. Enjoy, but be smart and wise. 

In my case, sexual fidelity is part of my marriage because that is the oath I swore as a Chrisitan that I still honor. If it wasn’t, having sex with another woman would not necessarily be a violation of fidelity as there is no sin to it, but one might challenge my wisdom.  Like it or not people get jealous and envious and that can lead to relationship issues. There are also cultural expectations to consider which do have an effect on how a person is perceived. This is not about sin anymore is the point, but rather what effects it might have on relationships and troth issues may or may not be affected depending on the specific nature of oaths of fidelity. 

Conclusion:

After concluding that the Bible is a human book with no proof of inspiration and the sin is a concept made up by the writers of the Bible.  There are only two things left on my four objections to Christianity.  The first is the other imaginary thing the Bible creates which is the solution to sin being Salvation in Christ and finally, the god of the Bible seems to have very suspect standards of justice.

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!

“Objections to Christianity – Part 1 – The Bible’s Inspiration by God” (Revised August 2019) – Odin’s Eye – Theological Objections to Christianity.

/ Ed Raby Sr / Leave a comment

Happy Thor’s Day

August 2019 Revision Notes:

It has been almost a year since I wrote these originally starting in November of 2018.  When I got to the rotation in Odin’s Eye the last time where I was going to deal with these objections again, I saw no need for revision but rather simply laid it out there that no one had responded to them to that date and moved on into the rest of the Rotation for Odin’s Eye. 

This time though I feel that I need to spend four weeks of Odin’s Eye doing some revisions that will either clarify my position, add some other thoughts or edit for other issues.  Such edits will be marked by italics.  When archived, they will appear under the original post on this Page: My Four Theological Objections to Christianity

 Mostly though this is a cut and paste with some revisions. As the series goes on there will be more revisions as I can see the need for things to change a bit in the other three objections.  In this one, however, the objective remains pretty much the same. 

Introduction:

I want to state upfront, this is a long post. I want to be complete as possible in stating this objection and the ones that follow.  Mostly as I will state later that I for a long time wanted answers; I still do.  It was hard leaving my faith because I wanted so desperately to believe. Reason itself eventually prevailed and I will stand by that decision.   The reason I am putting a lot of words into this is that I still would accept answers: if they could be proven rationally that Christianity is the true religion.

I have written on my crisis of faith a couple of times. Despite some people’s assertion that this was due to personal events, it actually started in 2015 with my second objection which is that I think ‘sin’ is a man-made up concept.  It started when I preached a message about sin and I had heard a quote that week from a critic of Christianity that basically said sin was made up and that because of it Christianity solves a problem of its own making.

I will get into this moment in more detail in my second objection post, but it got me rethinking everything in the light of skepticism and I began to form four theological objections for which I still have no satisfactory answers. While the sin question got my original thinking going, it is this first question involving the Bible and divine inspiration that forms the foundation of the other three.

Now, I want to state for the record that I am no amateur when it comes to the Bible or Theology.  1) I have degrees in both Biblical Studies (BA) and Theological Studies (MA).  2) I am a ‘professional’ theologian and have been since 1996.  3) I was a Christian from the time I was eight and as I approach my 50th birthday that would have been close it forty-two years. 4) I was a pastor (now retired) for twenty years and have spent many years since school studying the Bible and engaging theological questions.  5) I have had several crisis moments in my theology and up until two to three years ago I could answer them all or found ways to explain them.  Not anymore.

I will also say I am not hostile to Christians, I get it.  It took me a long time to face the facts of the objections I will present in this series. I still am open to anything that answers them.  My largest problem when I discuss this is people sometimes get offended because I seem to be very aggressive, but I am not really doing that, just being as honest as I can.  People don’t always like it when you ask questions that are hard about what they believe. Cognitive dissonance is a real thing, so I get.  Understand I am not being hostile to your faith if you have it.  I am just being hostile to mine or what mine used to be. That’s because I take as a central core idea that if the God of the Bible is the real god and the Bible is inspired by him, then it should make sense and have rational proof this is so.

Faith:

Bottom Line, faith is trusting in something that you have no evidence for and that is the problem.  You hope it is true and you believe it is true, but you don’t know it is true. This is particularly true for many church doctrines and one of the most notable is the divine inspiration of scripture.  The reason I can say this is no matter what school of thought you follow in looking at inspiration, there is no evidence that God came down and inspired the Bible.  You simply have to believe the simple statement “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.”  There is no attempt to prove this, just a statement of fact that the reader must simply accept.

An example is probably in order:

“The Rabyd Skald’s writings are inspired by the god Odin.  Everything he writes comes straight from the mouth of the god Odin.” 

You say ridiculous.  I ask why?  You say because I simply have made an assertion and have offered no proof that what I say is true. I want to tell you the Bible does the exact same thing with the exact same level of proof that God came down and directly inspired the writers of the Bible – none. It’s pure faith, no evidence even from the Bible itself.  The Bible writers simply assert this; they never prove it.

Religion:

Looking at the doctrine of inspiration historically, once again we have no proof of the inspiration of Scripture by God, just the creation of the doctrine of inspiration and various councils of men deciding which books are inspired.  There is no record of God coming down and saying – “these books are my inspired word.” Just groups of men doing that.  That is what you actually see.

It stands to reason that religions do this.  In the end, you need a common core of beliefs and authority and it is far easier to make a group of writings do that because it has a greater chance of standing the test of time.  Especially if you inject a tradition of copying and transcribing these books from one generation to the next. Even in this though, two problems develop. 1) People abuse the authority of said books and can twist their meaning and 2) the transcription of said books can be flawed.

The second brings up an additional inspiration question which is: ‘Is the Bible still inspired even though people have put mistakes into it and changed it from one language to the next where meaning is going to get changed?’  The human factors are definitely present in the Bible.  Does that undermine inspiration or simply point to the fact that the Bible is a wholly human book? Because we don’t really have proof God is involved, are we just making up the whole divine inspiration thing in order to make this human book have more significance?

Theology:

I spent a great deal of time and digital ink pouring over this question of inspiration.  On my blog All Things Rabyd (which is still there although no longer active)  I spent nine posts looking at the various theories of divine inspiration.  You can find the link to all of them here. I eventually settled on Dynamic Inspiration as the best possible explanation to handle the human element of the bible.  That much like the doctrines of Christ state Jesus was 100% God and 100% Man, so was the bible the same way.  It satisfied me for a while but there was a fatal flaw in the whole thing.

The flaw? I still had no proof positive that the 100% divine inspiration part was real.  There is no photograph of God reaching into the head of Paul or Moses inspiring them to write things.  I mean you could say God is the inspiration for the Bible like a person might be inspired to write about nature from being outside. There is however no proof that God took an active hand in telling the authors what to write or how to write it.  That is purely a matter of whether you believe that or not.  It really is blind faith when you consider that particular question.

Spirituality: 

I will probably handle other objections involving scripture at a later date.  My purpose today is to get the main parts of my first objection to Christianity out there.  The question always comes – do I still read the Bible and what value do I place on it?  Well, yes I do.  I value it in that it contains a lot of ‘truth’ small ‘t’.  I just don’t think it’s the Truth with a capital ‘T‘.  Rather a lot of men wrote about their sincere belief in God.  God inspired them in that way and they wrote but in the end, it was human inspiration ABOUT the divine.  It was not God coming down and whispering in their ear what to write, no matter what their claims.

It also, because it is a human book and not divine to me, contains a lot of Bull Shit and spiritual opinion by ancient authors which may or may not be valid.  You still have to use a lot of judgment in looking at the Bible because if some of it is objectively true then the god of the Bible becomes at times both inconsistent and a sadistic tyrant.   

For me, I still draw a lot of inspiration from the Bible.  Some of its stories are great.  It has men wrestling with the question about God.  Some of the teachings of Christ are some of the best on human relationships you will ever see.  That said, it is only one avenue of being inspired, not the only one and it is a very human book.  In short, it has its flaws, and I think some of the morality it promotes could be questioned as to whether it actually does good or not.

Conclusion:

When the doctrine of inspiration goes, then you can look at the Bible objectively.  This caused me to really realize the god of the Bible has a few problems.  1) Sin seems to be made up as a concept and used to control the behavior of people 2) The plan of salvation God comes up with does not speak well of supreme being because it makes God both sadistic and masochistic. 3) God’s justice seems a little suspect especially when you consider final judgment.

The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard, and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.

Skaal!!!