Skip to main content

The Tao of Christianity

Organized religion tends to greatly perplex me. I suppose I have difficulty with blind faith. I trust science, the observable, over religion, or the unobservable. However, I have more trouble with the contradictions, the irrationality that resides in organized religion. Since I was born and raised in the U.S. by Christian parents, I'm most familiar with that religion. So, let me run a thought by you which makes me scratch my head.

The story goes that Satan is responsible for man's sins, correct? Jesus lived a perfect life and sacrificed himself on a cross to die for these infinite sins, right? Through Jesus, we will be saved and forever live in a paradise known as heaven, true? So, Jesus is seen as the savior of man kind, yes?

Alright, so what if the devil didn't exist? Then what? Would sin then not exist? What would Jesus then have to sacrifice himself for? If it weren't for sin, Jesus wouldn't need to save us from what doesn't exist. So, my question is, where would Jesus be without Satan and vice versa? So, wouldn't man's fate be dependent upon both Jesus and Satan? Without sin (Satan), there would cease to exist a savior for those very sins (Jesus). There we have it. In Christianity, there are two saviors, whom are each other's nemesis - Jesus and Satan. Like I said, organized religion doesn't make much sense to me, especially when it comes to contradictions and irrationality.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...
2 comments
Read more

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html
Post a Comment
Read more

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...
2 comments
Read more