Hypocrisy of Dave

                                         CHRISTIAN HYPOCRISY

“I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. You Christians are so unlike your Christ.” –Mahatma Gandhi

Greetings, everyone! I am Wright. Here I am going to tell you about the hypocrisy of (so-called) Christians or Christian missionaries. If you are an orthodox Christian or a Christian fanatic, then I advise you to read no further.

I came across the blog of a man named Dave Gifford who “claims” to be a Christian missionary. I doubt that he actually is. He claims EACH and EVERY word of the Bible not only to be absolute but also THE WORD OF GOD. But my sense of logic won’t let me accept something as the absolute truth without any evidence. After all, THAT is the reason God gave us the power of “logic.” So I had an argument with him. But, it seems that God has made a horrible mistake. He has even created human beings without giving them the power of logic and the power of thinking. Let’s see how the discussion went.

(Note that I am writing down the discussion briefly and parodically. So, this isn’t exactly how the conversation took place. It has been shortened and made easy for you to understand.)

Dave: I believe each and every word in the Bible to be the absolute Word of God.

Wright: You claim every word in the Bible to come from God. So, what about the animal sacrifices in the Old Testament? Would a loving, kind and compassionate God really be pleased with the brutal killing of his innocent children?

Dave: Yes, God did allow animal sacrifice. It was done so that humans could be absolved of their sins. Every one of us deserves to go to hell for rebelling against God, but by offering blood sacrifice, the penalty for our sins was paid.

Wright: But, what about God being kind and compassionate? Would a compassionate God really allow the killing of innocent animals so that humans who committed horrible sins would be free?

Dave: That idea repulses me too. But, that is why Jesus came and offered himself as a sacrifice so that we no longer have to sacrifice animals to pay for our sins.

Wright: You are still missing the point. Why would a compassionate God ask for blood sacrifice to forgive sins? And, if Jesus died to replace the animals, it would mean that God was hungry for sacrifices. In other words, God indirectly killed Jesus.

Dave: God IS kind and compassionate. But, if the Bible claims that God wanted sacrifices, so it means that he DID want them.

(In other words, poor Dave failed to prove his point logically. And he was still sticking to the false idea of Biblical perfection.)

Wright: What about prophets like Isaiah and Jeremiah? They told us that God doesn’t ask for blood sacrifice? Even Jesus himself said that God wants mercy and not sacrifice. So, don’t you think the Bible is contradiction itself?

Dave: Actually, their point was that God prefers mercy over sacrifice. If someone offered animal sacrifices to God but still continued to sin, the sacrifices were meaningless. That was their point. They didn’t mean to say that animal sacrifices were never asked for.

Wright: Jeremiah 7:22 says that neither God nor Moses asked for animal sacrifices. Doesn’t it make Exodus 12 invalid?

Dave: It doesn’t. Jeremiah was saying that sacrifice was not the main point. God did ask them to offer sacrifices but the main point was having righteousness which the people didn’t have.

Wright: But Jeremiah clearly said, “I did NOT ask for sacrifices.” He never said that animal sacrifice is the “less” important point. He is saying that God NEVER asked for sacrifices. Even Jesus said, “I desire mercy, NOT sacrifice.” Psalms 40: 6 also clearly says that God does NOT want sacrifices. So, it means he never asked for blood sacrifice.

(Now, note that Dave is going to derail the topic.)

Dave: God did ask for animal sacrifice. But, we no longer need to offer sacrifices now since Jesus already paid the price for our sins.

(Even though I PROVED that God hates blood sacrifice, Dave remained unconvinced.)

Wright: Don’t you know that opposing animal sacrifice was the very reason Jesus was crucified?

Dave: No, many scholars would disagree with you on that.

Wright: Forget what your so-called scholars say. I do have evidence.

(This evidence I gave him is listed below. You needn’t read it thoroughly if you don’t want to. After all, the conversation between me and Dave is the one you should pay attention to.)

(John 2:13-16 says- "When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the Temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords and drove all from the Temple, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said: 'Get out of here.'

Matthew's gospel does not detail the kind of animals that were being sold for slaughter, but it gives the same order of events.

"Jesus entered the Temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. 'It is written,' he said to them, 'My house will be called a house of prayer but you are making it a den of robbers.'" (Matthew21:12-13)

The same account is given in the gospel of Mark who, like Matthew, also reports that Jesus accused those at the Temple of making God's house into a "den of robbers." And there is universal acknowledgement that in both gospels, when Jesus said this, he was quoting from the prophet Jeremiah (7:11).

Now, you may have noticed that prophet Jeremiah had hurled the same accusation at the people of his own time, almost six hundred years earlier. He said it while standing at the Temple entrance, after he had already warned the people "do not shed innocent blood in this place." And when Jeremiah said God's house had been turned into a den of robbers it could not have had anything to do with moneychangers--they did not exist in his time.

In the time of Jeremiah, as in the time of Jesus, there was a great distinction made between "robbers" and "thieves." In contemporary times that distinction can best be understood by comparing the crime of petty theft with crimes of armed robbery by those who violently attack/kill their victims. But in ancient Israel there was an even greater distinction. A thief could be anyone who succumbed to a momentary impulse to steal something, but a robber was someone for whom violent crime and killing was a lifestyle.

Both Jesus and Jeremiah were indignant about the violence of sacrificial worship, not the possibility of petty theft by moneychangers. It was the violence of the system, the "robbing of life" from innocent victims in the name of God, that they were condemning. The moneychangers operating in the time of Jesus were driven out of the Temple because they were taking part in the process of sacrificial religion, not because they may have been cheating the pilgrims.

The gospel of Mark correlates Christ's attempt to dismantle the sacrificial system with the plot to kill him. Like Matthew's gospel, Mark's account of the Temple Cleansing starts by saying that Jesus "began driving out those who were buying and selling there." It goes on to relate how he explained to the people why he was doing this, by quoting Jeremiah's opposition to animal sacrifice: "My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations. But you have made it a 'den of robbers.'" And in the verse of scripture immediately following that statement, Mark reports that "The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard about this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him because the whole crowd was amazed at his teachings." (Mark 11:18).

It is ridiculous to claim that the religious leaders of Christ's time would have plotted his death because he undermined the function of the moneychangers. Nor would the crowd have been "amazed at his teachings" if Jesus was simply telling them to make sure they were not short-changed when they purchased Temple coins. What the people were amazed at was his condemnation of animal sacrifice; it had been hundreds of years since that kind of condemnation had been heard in Jerusalem. And it would not be tolerated.
A few days after he attacked the cult of animal sacrifice, Jesus was crucified. The religious leaders of his time were determined to preserve the belief that it had been ordained by God, who demanded its continuance.

That determination is echoed in the teachings of contemporary Christian leaders. In spite of Jesus, and in spite of the many biblical denunciations of animal sacrifice, people like you continue to maintain the ancient fiction that it was God who demanded His creatures be killed and butchered as an act of worship So, it defeats the whole purpose for which Jesus died.)

Dave: I am still not convinced that your version of the death of Jesus is correct.

Wright: Even though I gave you irrefutable evidence? Fine, then. So, point out why you remain unconvinced. And why exactly do you think Jesus was crucified?

(Now, instead of refuting my arguments since he can’t, let’s see what reply Dave has to give.)

Dave: I must warn you, Wright. I am a pretty busy person. I have a church to take care of, and a family to attend to. So, I don’t have time to answer all your questions. In fact, for the questions you asked, I had to spend hours doing research.

(He talks as if he is the ONLY one who has a job and a family to take care of.)

Wright: You gave me neither a proper answer nor a proper argument to any of my questions, in the first place. So, I doubt you did any “research.” Again, I am also not asking you to do any “research”, but I want you to prove your points using plain old logic.

(So, Dave failed to prove his point logically that God asked for animal sacrifice. He also failed to prove his point that Jesus died for some reason other than opposing animal sacrifice.)

Dave: … (Silence)

Wright: Fine, then. I won’t push this issue any further. But, tell me this. Even if the Bible was the Word of the God, how can you be so sure that this is the very Bible which was written years ago? Many historians say that people have falsified parts of the Bible. Many historians claim that parts of the Bible were tampered with. Many also say that wicked people inserted their own words but said that they came from God.

Dave: Historians, who say that the Bible was tampered with, do so, so that they can throw away things that they don’t like.

Wright: I disagree. They have mountains of evidence that the Bible WAS tampered with, especially in the 4^th century. Also, what evidence can you give me to prove that the Bible was never tampered with?

Dave: … (Silence)

Wright: Hello?

(He is going to derail me again.)

Dave: I understand that you are just compassionate about animals, Wright. But, the Bible is the Word of God whether you like it or not.

Wright: Sigh…

Dave: Any more questions?

Wright: When God created the world, it was perfect. There was neither killing nor any kind of violence. Everyone lived happily. And God gave humans permission to eat only plants. So, aren’t Christians supposed to be vegetarians today? Why do majority of them eat meat?

Dave: But he gave us permission to eat meat after the Flood.

Wright: Wrong. He gave only Noah permission to eat meat because all the plants were destroyed by the Flood.

Dave: But Jesus ate fish in the Gospel of Luke.

Wright: That’s because as I said before, the Bible was tampered with. Jesus was a vegetarian.

Dave: I disagree.

Wright: Fine, then. Even if Jesus did eat flesh, that was before the modern day pollution of meat. Would Jesus meat today? Our slaughterhouses are disgustingly inhumane. Check www.meat.org to know more. Do you really think that Jesus would approve of such cruelty?

Dave: I know that slaughterhouses are cruel. But, boycotting meat is not the only way to solve this problem.

Wright: So can you suggest a better way to stop this cruelty?

Dave: … (Silence)

Wright: Sigh... So, tell me. If the Bible is really precise and the absolute Word of God, how come we have four Gospels? Only one of them can be precise according to the order of events and the events that took place. All four of them describe Jesus doing different things but only one can be absolute. And, if one is absolute, it would also mean that the others are wrong. So, which one of the four Gospels is precise?

Dave: … (Silence)

Wright: Paul McCartney said that if anyone wants to save the planet, all they have to do is stop eating meat. So, as a Christian, isn’t it your duty to save the planet by going vegetarian?

Dave: The Beatles are known to say many foolish things. They also claimed to be better than Jesus.

(I doubt they said such a thing. Even if they did, would it make Paul McCartney wrong?)

Wright: Fine, then. Forget the Beatles. What about Leo Tolstoy? He said that as long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields. St. Basil said that anyone who eats meat can’t have virtue. St. Francis of Assisi called animals our brothers and sisters. Are you saying that these great people were wrong?

Dave: … (Silence)

Wright: Hello?

Dave: Wright, I thought that you wanted to have a peaceful discussion with me, but it seems that your goal is only to criticize me incessantly. I told you that I am a busy person and have a lot of things to do, and I can’t answer each and every question of yours with each and every detail. So, I must discontinue this conversation.

Wright: He, who never questions, never learns. You claim the Bible to be a “holy” book and expect others to do to the same. But, can you really expect people to accept it as “holy” without asking any questions?

Dave: The Bible is the Word of God. We have no right to question it. We should only obey. I am sorry but I don’t like your attitude. I am going to have to stop this discussion. And, even if you comment on my blog, I won’t approve your comments.

Wright: So be it.

Now, I don’t think much more is left to be said. This conversation alone must have told you about the mentality of these so-called Christians. If Jesus were to come back to this world, what would he do? He would fight these VERY so-called Christians who are corrupting His teachings.

Dave is looking for converts. Dave wants more and more people to join Christianity. I’m fine with that. I am an animal rights activist. I want people to stop torturing and killing animals. But I can provide logical reasons and arguments about why animals should deserve kindness and compassion. People have also scientifically proved that animals can feel pain and so they deserve humane treatment. But, people like Dave can’t provide logical or scientific reasons for “why” and “how” the Bible is “holy”. The Bible can’t be “holy” just because they claim that it is.

I am not saying that the Bible is an “evil” book. In fact, I have been inspired by many quotes and passages in the Bible. But, that alone doesn’t make the Bible a “holy” book, because the Bible is also full of hypocrisy and self-contradictions. Even Mahatma Gandhi said that he didn’t regard every word in the Bible to come from God.

People like Dave have no sense of logic or justice. They were just brainwashed by false doctrines and by ignorant preachers who taught them that there is no other truth than the Bible.

People like Dave don’t understand logic. But, don’t get the wrong idea. My purpose of writing this article was not to defame Dave. But my purpose is to bring every misguided Christian into the right path. I don’t want them to become atheists nor do I want them to adopt another faith. But, I want them to become true Christians, and I want them to rid themselves of their hypocrisy.

Christians are supposed the follow the teachings of Christ instead of paying so much attention to the Bible because they are Christians, not “Biblians”. Not a single word in the Bible was written by Jesus. So, why do they take the Bible to be literally true when Jesus himself didn’t?

We know about the story of the adulterous woman who was brought before Jesus so that she could be stoned to death. “People who commit adultery should be stoned to death” that’s what the Old Testament’s law says. So, Jesus was asked whether it would be right to stone her. Jesus replied, “The one among you who has not sinned should be the one to throw the first stone.” And, since, everyone knew that they were sinners, left the woman alone. And, Jesus forgave her and let her go. In other words, Jesus knew that the laws of the Old Testament were flawed and imperfect and He himself rejected them.

“Should adulterers be stoned as the Old Testaments says?” if this question is brought before a so-called Christian, his answer would probably be, “Yes, people who commit adultery should be stoned to death. But, Jesus died for our sins. So, in today’s world, we won’t stone an adulterer to death.” But, as we can clearly see from the story, Jesus forgave the adulterous woman before he died.

So, we can know how today’s so-called Christians are corrupting the teachings of Jesus even though they claim Him to be their Savior.

Also, it is funny to note a few things like:

1.       Christians talk about love and compassion, while the Old Testament talks about child murder, human sacrifice, animal sacrifice, genocides, mass murder and what not?

2.      In the Old Testament, for a loving, kind and compassionate God, He really talks a lot about how much He wants to KILL people and DESTROY cities. Doesn’t this God even know that destroying cities would also kill the innocent children and animals? Surely, EACH and EVERY person and animal living in a city CAN’T be that evil!

3.      They say Jesus died for our sins. So, if Jesus already died for our sins, why do we need to be righteous? Why do sinners still go to hell?

Of course, this list can go on and on. I can also continue telling you more about the hypocrisy of Dave and other such self-proclaimed Christians. But, for now, this is all.

Blessed are the merciful.