Daily Archives: April 23, 2010
Shocking. CedarCreek, a Toledo-area megachurch, is trying to be relevant. They are planning two meetings about sex from God’s point of view, the first titled “Sex: It’s Bigger Than You Think” on April 25 and “From Messing Up to Making Up” on May 2. As per CedarCreek’s usual M.O., there is an aggressive advertising campaign and a website.
While I think that it is refreshing that many churches are starting to eliminate the taboos once placed on talking about sex, not everyone seems to agree:
But the Rev. Andrew Edwards, pastor of Northwest Baptist Church in Toledo, said church is not the place to talk about sex. He voiced strong opposition to CedarCreek’s campaign, saying that discussing sex with teens would make them more likely to engage in it because it would “stir up their emotions.”
The pastor criticized CedarCreek for “letting the world dictate what they do instead of the Bible.”
“What they’re using is the sensual, not the spiritual,” Mr. Edwards said. “I oppose what they do. I don’t think what they’re doing is going to help. They’re just using it to market to teenagers.” (source)
Often, the world charges that the church simply isn’t relevant on sex anymore. To the world, monogamy is cruel, premarital sex is a “right,” and those who would preach abstinence prior to marriage are evil. Adultery is just another fact of life, and the sooner that the church accepts that, the better.
We’re evil for expecting people to exercise a little self-control? It can’t be about that, can it? God shouldn’t actually expect us to keep it in our pants unless we’re in a committed, loving, relationship sealed with the sacrament of marriage, should he? I mean, that’s just cruel. And then, once married, he actually expects us to honor those marriage vows?
No wonder Richard Dawkins described God famously in The God Delusion with all of those lovely adjectives strung together on page 31. It’s just plain evil to give us a beautiful gift and then expect us to actually obey rules with it. We should be able to have sex wherever, whenever, and with whomever we please, regardless if we’re married, single, divorced, underage, or related to the person after whom we lust.
Self-control is for the birds. After all, we’re just animals that have evolved higher intelligence. Animals don’t have all those restrictions; they have sex with any partner that will have them! We’re no different than any animal, so why should we obey all of these rules when it comes to sex, the most fun that anyone can have, ever?
Sorry, Mr. Edwards, but obviously I disagree. It is precisely because the world has the view of sex that I just satirized is why the church should educate people about it. People should understand that sex is a beautiful thing, when exercised properly. But few people are willing to practice the appropriate self-control, and even fewer understand the proper use of sex.
And that is where the church comes in.
Ignoring this problem will not make it go away.
Here is a great example of irony:
Did all you atheists know that there is a whole month the god botherers are dedicating just to pray for us to jump aboard the crazy train of delusion? I didn’t know about this till I saw it on an old classmate’s Facebook profile! The god believers have dedicated a whole month “and beyond” to “Pray for an Atheist”.
Listen you god believing fools, it ain’t gonna do any good. Your god doesn’t exist and no matter how hard you wish, no matter how many magical incantations you say, there will still be an ever-growing population of atheists in this world.
I’ve never met an atheist that cares whether they’re prayed for or not (outside of the desire that the person praying do something better with their time). I think this is a subtle play on the idea that “atheists” are really “satanists”; why would any atheist have a “strong objection” to being prayed for, when most atheists just consider prayer to be wishful thinking?
So, you don’t have any strong feelings about being prayed for, but you take the time to complain about it an online forum anyway?
And the author of the post says this in retaliation to a believer:
Why do we mock the believer when he fears that we are going to spend an eternity in a terrible place for merely not being able to believe due to lack of evidence that this Sky Boss really exists? It’s because of how smugly you all think that you have some superior knowledge over us, when in fact you do not. You simply choose to follow some ancient mythology, invented my human beings as a coping device for things they could not explain nor understood. Humans cling to this afterlife belief because they are afraid of death. Christianity is basically a death cult, looking to an unproven afterlife while thinking that this earthly life is somehow not good enough to have lived. (emphasis added)
WOW. It seems to me that it is the atheist who thinks that they have superior knowledge over the believer. The blog I pulled this from, God is for Suckers, is dedicated to:
Commentary, news, and rants on the evils and stupidity of belief in the big invisible daddy in the sky. Illuminating and watchdogging the widespread attempts to institutionalize the theocratic rule of the US. Making fun of believers everywhere.
The whole blog presupposes that the atheist knows something that the believer doesn’t. More irony.
Yet more irony:
Others have said plenty about how prayer can be arrogant, so I feel I should bring up one of my usual points: Faith is a monument to pride, arrogance, and hubris. It’s the act of declaring oneself to be the supreme arbiter of the universe, and the belief that gods bow to the faithful’s definitions of them.
I prefer the humility involved in science.
Humility like PZ Meyers displays?
It’s rather neat that modern scientists know more than God. (source)