Christianity: The belief that some cosmic Jewish Zombie can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master, so that he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
Makes perfect sense.
I am a christian. When I first saw this I was not horrified. I laughed. Put aside your personal feelings for a moment and really look at the words. Here in lies the weapon of your figurative enemy. It fits all the criteria above, its flip, humorous, and although its somewhat slanted it is somewhat honest. Then its topped off with "Makes perfect sense." The paragraph above it is nothing more than a setup for this line. It is this small line that actually conveys the message the author wanted to convey. The author is saying "See, this is all ridiculous", the preceding paragraph is nothing more than a delivery mechanism.
It wouldn't take much at all to change the entire tone of this message. Here's a rough example:
The question isn't do I believe that some cosmic Jewish Zombie can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master, so that he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
The question is: Why don't you?
Another option is to take the above narrative and add a second paragraph using the same slanted view and humor to describe a current and generally well known set of factual events. The idea is that everyone knows the "factual event" and then they read how jaded or humorous it sounds with changed in a similar manner. The comparison to a actually fact causes the reader to accept for the current context that both are fact. Now throw in some humorous closing at the end like: "Sarcasm - turning facts to fun for over 1000 years!"
With just a little change you've created something memorable, funny, and easily shared. Best of all, tucked inside those tiny lines lies a message you wanted to get across. These examples are just rough ideas. I am not suggesting compromising our beliefs, but I don't believe God will be overly upset at me for referring to Eve as a "rib woman", I've seen funnier translations of bible terms from language to language.
People grow, change, and evolve. In order to continue to reach people we must be willing to change with them, without compromising our underlying principles. It saddens and scares me to think the only thing coming between reaching someone and not might be our (myself included) own ego or personal comfort levels.
2 comments:
I agree with you, but the fundementalists would have a hayday with it.
Traditions should be done because of the meaning, not because that's the way it's always been done. Religions are based a lot on traditions, and many of them seem outdated or the focus on the teaches is not on the meaning but the act.
In Catholicism, the appointing of the new pope spoke volumes to the followers about the direction the Church would be heading.
I was saddened by the passing of Pope John Paul II. He was the people's pope. His travelled everywhere and met with millions of people. He was kind and promoted tolerance. He was involved in updating doctrine.
Pope Benedict XVI is much different. He seems much more reserved and traditional. He's behind the movement to get mass back to Latin instead of "the people's" language (that Pope John Paul II helped insistitute).
Although on the other hand, religion also shouldn't be a fad or a trend. It will never stick around.
I really think this exact issue had a lot to do with Obama being elected as well. He is easier to connect with for younger generations. McCain looks old, feels old, and in a way represents old ideas in appearance and habit. I'm not saying the entire election was one due to Obama's "shiny newness", I'm just saying I think it was a bigger factor than some realized.
Post a Comment