I Paddled Me A Holy Man

My hometown is in Alabama. Typical small town in the south. Deep in the bible belt.

Recently a local preacher felt the need to tell everyone that unless they fell on their knees, Amerika was lost. He also made a rather racist comment about how we may all be speaking a "foreign" language someday.

My response, which was published in my hometown paper yesterday:


This letter is a response to one made recently by Rev. L**** ******* of **********. In his letter called "What did we expect?",


Hello Rev *****,

I bet when you wrote that letter, you didn't expect someone from 3000 miles away to take issue with it.

As I sat here the other day, with the amazing beauty of the coastal rainforest all around me, I saw something online that brought ugliness to my eyes. It was your letter.

I'm going to fault you on two things concerning the content of that letter.

The first was the line I didn't expect to hear from a holy man. Towards the end, you said "we may be speaking a foreign language".

May I remind you that this is a nation of immigrants? And because certain wars went certain ways, you're speaking english rather than french or spanish. You could just have easily been made to speak either of those two. I suggest you learn spanish, because by the year 2042, white people are going to be a minority in the United States.

When you make a remark like you did, you are trying to preserve the white skinned, white bread America like you grew up in. You can't do that. You may live in an isolated part of the world, but you need to understand that the world outside of happy valley is mostly non white and non Christian. As I understand Christianity, God's warranty covers people of all colors and languages. You have done a disservice to all those who are non english and non white by making the comment that you did. I hope you will take some time to reflect on the truth of what I say.

And this leads me to the second issue of your letter.

Religion is an all pervasive force in the southland. It affects the culture with a depth seldom found anywhere else in the US. And its been known to impose itself on other people against their will. When I mention to people out here that my hometown is in a dry county, I get some odd looks. They can't believe that such places still exist. I understand that the school system down there is hurting for money? Alcohol generates considerable tax revenue. You'll not get any of that money because the churches have a bearhug on what is legal. They've imposed their idea of morality on other people at the expense of the community. And you people let them. Because you were too lazy to get out and vote against them.

You want to hold out for heaven later, or send your kids to decent schools today?

Now Rev, you said that people should get down on their knees. I'm going to counter and say that people should think for themselves. And learn some personal responsiblity along the way instead of hanging their problems on Jesus.

Between the government and religion, some of us have had enough of being told to return to our knees. We've already tried your way.

Its time to stand up and be heard.


x

Boy howdy. That felt good. Bible Thumpers are probably forming a convoy north as I write this.

 

Xexon:
I'm curious, what's your rationale for how the "Christian" societies gained the upperhand in this world, since their beliefs are so bogus.

Even a cursory look at history will show "Christian" societies to have been more successful financially, medically, industrially, in inventions......and on and on.

Plaese don't make the tired old argument about success not having anything to do with the "Christian" part of the society. The point is that they were self proclaimed "Christian" societies and while the "Christian" part of that society may, or may not, be responsible for the success it obviously didn't preclude success.

 

Yes, and the good old christian slave trade helped didn't it?

And the christian wars - yes they were self proclaimed christians - WW I, WW II. Vietnam, Iraq etc etc.

And the technology, and the really enlightened way these self proclaimed christians allowed it to be deployed - maybe though they are just trying to hasten the end? Or was it for financial success? Funny that , because recall, the needles eye is thin.

Financial 'success' - like the international banking/ususry system you mean?

 

No, the "christian" slave trade cost society, it didn't help it.
Slavery is going on today in non-christian societies, all the societies that tolerate/embrace Christianity, have made slavery illegal.

I'd say WWI & WWII were well worth fighting and winning. Vietnam and Iraq are examples of what happens when you try to mollify, instead of destroy, your enemies.

So, why is it that a lot of the societies who deny Christianity, are still getting sick from going to the bathroom in their own drinking water? They've been here as long as the Christian societies have.

The international banking system is what you get with a bunch of power hungry socialists, not Christianity.

 

Like in the UK where Polish people come to work for £2.00 per hour?
And illegal chinese immigrants don't get paid at all and live up to 20 in a room?

WWI - main result of the allied victory was to set up the conditions in Germany for the rise of Hitler. Millions died and absolutely nothing was acheived except the bankrupcy of 19th c christian values.

WW II. In europe - Started by self -proclaimed christians, fighting other lots of self proclaimed christians. Fortunately, the orthodox version proved the more robust when it came to it.

Vietnam - a huge success all round wasn't it?

Iraq - economics. Nothing more. And a huge mistake which still goes on with absolutelt no end in sight.

.

You are clearly a person who lives ina cupboard. Christians were told 'no ususry' - It was to be a sin.
It was the Italian banking families of the renaissance who legitimated it within christian so-called culture, the Medici etc. This, in case you don't know, was centuries befire the idea of socialism was born as a political ideology. It is also the reason why the Jews, who were allowed to charge interest on loans by their religion, acted as the bankers of medieval christain europe. When King Richard wanted to go off on his crusade, it was to Jewish bankers he went for the money.
I don't think the guys who have made such a fine job of managing the financial system over the last 20 years have been very socialist. More like capitalist 'christian' fat cats with their little puppet politician pals.

 

Uh, Xtianity taught afterlife and a strong work ethic thus transforming the upcoming roman slave revolt and uprising into today's common consumer. Religion and State have forever been joined like adulterers. Thus society is still promoting their two greatest exploiters - the religious and state institutions.

Besides it's not improbable to see whole masses do the same thing for sheer joy of it, stupid, or not as it may be.

The real question is what happens after the belief system goes, can a township still live on?

 

So, the Polish people "come" to work, doesn't sound like slavery to me.

There was no victory in WWI, it was an armistice (big mistake), the ultimate victory came in WWII, which saved the western world from Hitler and his ilk.

Veitnam was another big mistake, not because we were fighting communism, but because we had lost the national will to win.

You need to make yourself aware of what Saddam Hussien was doing, before you proclaim that the Iraq war is just about economics. The reason the Iraq war has no end in sight is, again, we've never regained the national will to pull out all stops and destroy our enemies.

Usury is something different than reasonable intertest.

You have a small view of the definition of socialism, there have always been those power hungry people who want to take over the value a society produces.

I'm still wondering how you explain the difference between the political history of-- say North America and Africa. Supposedly there have been more people in Africa, for a longer period of time, than there has been in North America--why isn't Africa the home of the most powerful nation in the world?

 

No I expect you think they're lucky to get the chance to improve themselves. For £2.00 an hour. Price of 1 litre of fuel.
Meantime head of Northern Rock bank which failed under the credit crunch partly due to mismanagement,and has to be bailed out by the govt. gives a 400,000 bonus to its chief executive.

Your right about those power hungry people - but you got it back to front - they're called capitalists.That's why they had imperialism in the 19th c. That's why they launch economic wars like in Iraq. The BS about the tyrant saddam doesn't hold water. Why aren't US and UK troops in Zimbabwe if we all care so much about putting down oppresssive regiemes? Simple answer is there's no economic interest at stake.

As for you second question - Looks like the time of US dominance is over for good. Within 20 years China will dominate and control the world economy.

Perhaps you could explain how so, and why if so, during the middle ages when christianity was dominant, it was forbidden to christains to charge 'reasonable interest' as it was regarded, quite rightly, as usury.

 

Don't get me wrong, I despise anyone who'll use somebody for cheap labor for the purposes of lining their own pockets (one of the things the Bible says God is going to judge is the rightful wages that've been withheld from workers, I realize that's a matter of opinion/faith ), but that still doesn't make it slavery.

I think it shows the slide into socialism for the government to bail out a company, true capitalism doesn't allow for any government bailout. True capitalism earns its' own money by catering to the free market , while socialism confiscates its' money.

Is economics a wrong reason to fight a war? I'm not saying I believe that's the only reason we're in Iraq, but if you don't have economic freedom, you can't have any freedom at all.

I believe you're right about US world dominance being over shortly, we've lost our will and are just coasting on what respect/dominance we gained in our first 180 yrs.

What do you think was the reason that we were able to acheive world dominance over so many older areas of the world?

I've always thought of usury as excessive interest (maybe I'm wrong on its' definition).

Catholicism/religion was the dominant political force in Europe during the middle ages, not true Christianity.

 

Have you ever been to the southern US?

It's poor overall, with pockets of wealth. After the garment industry moved out and went overseas, poverty has become a way of life even more than it used to be.

Religion appeals to poor people. At least it gives comfort when nothing else is available to them. And that is why its so difficult to break the hold religion has on the south. The fire breathing preachers like I addressed control the very social fabric of small little towns. It needs to end.

The only competition would be better jobs.

Most down there are holding out for Jesus, because they know better jobs are nowhere in sight.



x

 

Some might say that socialism then returns the money to those who actually produce the wealth, rather than leaving it all in the hands of a few capitalists who appropriate the labour value of others for themselves.
Many enjoy excessive wealth on a level that is truly obscene in my view, which no doubt, is partly coloured by christian values.

You'd do better to ask a child whose parents have just been killed and itself lost an arm if it's a good reason. Personally I don't think it is a good reason. I think it actually represents a total failure and breakdown of civilized values.

Money, rescources, hard work all that helped America become great. And looking at it from outside, despite all the problems, it is still great in many ways. But I doubt America can compete with the far eastern economies in this coming century.

If you ask me whats wrong with America - I'd say it's the idea of personal fulfillment at the expense of others that is at the core of it. That leads to greed, and a blinkered way of viewing the world and human society. But that's also a european disease.

Usually it just means charging interest at all.

It's very doubtful if we'd have Christianity at all today if it hadn't been the religion of europe during the middle ages. It would have been lost - forgotten like most other religious cults of the late Roman Empire period.
Nearly all modern christianity has its roots in medieval christianity in one way or another. The church expunged pretty well any other doctrine than their own - the thing in its origins wsas probably distorted completely out of shape. It's quite easy to argue that subsequent reformers simply made the thing even worse, and took it even farther away from its original truth.
I agree that the medieval church left much to be desired, but it also seems likely to me that in their own minds they thought they were good Christians.


But what is Christianity if not a religion?
It could never have survived without the organization of the church.

 

Some might say that socialism returns the money to those who produce it, but if that's true, why take it in the first place?

I also think some people have wealth that is obscene, but if they did nothing illegal to produce it, then it belongs to them and shouldn't be confiscated. You really want government making the moral decision as to how much wealth people can legally achieve?

If your enemies can defeat you economically they can control you as surely as if they've defeated you militarily and if you see them making moves to control you, you'd better get off your butt and do something about it. If the threat is serious enough war is a reasonable response, unless you think it's better to let your enemies control you.

North America didn't start out with any more money, or resources, than S. America, Africa, Europe,...etc. and all humans are capable of working hard.

The "european disease" you speak of is more of a "human disease" (actually more of a "human failing")

To me, true Christianity isn't a religion; a religion is just another way man tries to justify himself (which thing God hates). Same same with the denial of God's deity/judgment. Christ didn't come proclaiming a religion, Christ said "you must be born again".

The New Testament is a slam against the idea of religion and a testament to the necessity of becoming a child of God through being born again. Christ called the religious bunch of His day "vipers, hypocrites, whited sepulchures, and said they were of their father, the devil".

Anyone who thinks they're a "good" Christian is negating the whole point of Christianity; which is: there is none good, no not one, (it's why we need saving).

 

For the first fourteen centuries of Christianity, there was nothing in particular that set Christian nations above other civilizations like China and Islam. As a matter of fact, they were quite backward by comparision. You ask why civilizations didn't develop in South and Central America and Sub-Saharan Africa, but of course they did. The Olmecs had an impressive civilization in Central America from 1400 to 400 BCE, the Maya civilization reached great heights in Central America between 250-900 ce, and the empires of Wagadou (750-1076A.D.), and Mali (1230-1600) were flourishing in West Africa when Europe was in its medieval period. Then something happened called the Renaissance, and after that, the commercial and industrial revolutions, that allowed the western nations to advance technologically, scientifically and commercially. Accompanying these changes, Christianity also underwent changes in a more secular direction. This, in particular, distinguishes the West from Islam. Discovery of the New World with its vast natural resources helped, as did the development of a democratic government with protection of religious freedom and separation of church and state. To answer your question adequately would require a treatise about the size of an average history book, but these are some of the factors I think should be considered. Why did Rome rise and fall? Why did pagan Greece flourish? Why did Islam spread across the Middle East? Why is the sky blue? Why is the grass green? What's your point? Civilizations come and go.

 

The thing is that whilst it may not be by illegal means they get their obscene wealth, it is nontheless often by means which totally overlook the well being of others. In short, it's pure selfishness, and in my view, totally at odds with the spirit of Christ's teachings.
If people won't regulate themselves by the power of the spirit or whatever, they will have to be regulated from outside. I don't think this world can take another 20 years of inane consumerism, which again, is a way of life very far from what Christ taught.



Christianity may not be a religion to you, but it is to millions of others.

 

Islam spread through Jihad - a big war to grab territory and spread it's pernicious doctrines.

My point is that modern civilization has really no spiritual basis, and hence is degenerating morally. Christianity it seems has been hijacked by those who simply want to maintain the status quo under which they're doing very well at the expense of others.
The capitalist system favours many un-christian principles such as competition, stamping down the weak, lack of care for other people, and complete lack of care for the earth itself.
It values people for what they have not what they are. It creates totally false values, and seeks to impose them on everyone. It's not about human beings but money and very little else.

 

I didn't imply that there were no other civilizations, my question was about the current state of world affairs that has developed. While I'm willing to listen and learn from someone who has other opinions about how a "christian" nation has achieved world dominance, my underlying point in asking that question was that surely "christianity" isn't harmfull to societies. Many paint christianity as very harmfull and detrimental to the advancement of the human race.

 

Do you really want government to determine what's selfish and what's not?

I agree, that selfishness is totally against Christ's teachings. You're saying the same things the founding fathers of the U.S. said- "If people won't govern themselves, this type of government will not work and people can't govern themselves without the redeeming blood of the Son of God."

What makes you think a government (which is composed of people) will be any less selfish than the people it is composed of. Somehow people with socialist leanings, seem to ignore the fact that selfishness concentrated in a government is just as bad a selfishness that can be found anywhere else and historically has a worse effect on people as a whole.

 

Sorry, I am going back to the original post, and I didn't get to read the original pastor's article, but one reply would seem to be

Souls have no nationality.

and

Love your neighbor as yourself.

 

Well my thinking is that if a govt. has people with a socialist agenda, they're likely to do more in terms of social levelling than those who are simply representing big business. The wealth that exists is likely to get spread out more, and less concentrated in the hands of a few.
Thats all really.

 

But the human race needs to advance a lot further and that in the near future or it seems likely we will face un-precedented disaster on many fronts.
I think there are elements in Christianity that can help, and others that need to change. Mainly, I'd say that as long as it sees itself as a religion in competition with other religions, and doesn't accept that it is only one among many spiritual paths, all of which are valuable in some respects, it is more a problem than part of the solution.