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 4th
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.
