Hail Mary, full of somethin'

Today I went to a catholic mass for the first time for my niece’s first communion and it was an experience I will not soon forget. This may weave back and forth and seem a little discombobulated but I’m trying to cover everything I saw.

First off let me say that I have nothing against anyone who is catholic. You are a follower of Christ just the same as me and in reality as long as you follow what SCRIPTURE says that you should we should all arrive at the same party. That being said here’s how it went down:

We arrive and step into the sanctuary and the first thing that you notice is that it is massive. This place makes apex look like a hole in wall compared to the size of it. The next thing I notice is all the crap everywhere. There are crosses and cups and boxes and thrones and organs and pulpits and tables and chairs and crosses and candles and lanterns and crosses…and this is just the stage. The organ alone was the size of a movie theater screen.

After we find our seats I see that there are three books in front of us in the book holder thing on the back of the pew. Also attached to the pew was a fold out knee rest for those that want to be serious bout some prayin. I opened the first book to check out the Bible, because I’ve always heard that the catholic Bible has more books in it the standard Bible. Alas it was a hymn book. I opened the second book, it was also a hymn book. I knew that the final book was too small to be a Bible, and I was correct, It was another hymnal.

By this time the priest has walked in carrying the largest Bible I’ve ever seen, and I don’t mean in thickness, I mean in size, it was like 30 inches by 20 inches and he held it over his head the whole time. Everyone stands and sings a song and then the priest sing-talks a psalm which was the first thing that freaked me out. He sounded like a monk. And since this post will take forever to cover everything I saw, I’m just going to go over likes and dislikes.


Likes

The Priest: the priest was named father Satish and to my surprise was a young Indian man, rather then a old white dude. He interacted well with the children who were known as the “first communicants” and was engaging. We were there for over an hour and his sermon was only 10 minutes long but what he talked about I enjoyed. He spoke to the kids about something that I found to be completely unbiblical but the main point he was trying to make was heard loud and clear, “accepting Christ into your life is the most important thing that you’ll ever do.” I couldn’t agree more, but the way he wanted the children to go about it I’ll go into in a little bit.

The time: I thought we would be sitting there for 3 hours but it took just over and hour.

The exercise: with all of the stand up sit down, I got a bit of a workout.

Dislikes (this list may be longer)

The idolatry: the two biggest things on the stage had the least to do with Christ, unless there is some meaning that I don’t understand. One was a huge gold and blue sun with stars and triangles all over it. What it had to do with Christ I wasn’t sure. The second was this huge square gold picture hanging from the ceiling. It was divided into four pictures: a lion, a goat, an eagle, and a fourth thing that the sun was glaring off of, so I couldn’t really see it, but again, where is Jesus in this?

Scripture: Father Satish told this to innocent children, and I quote, “once you take this sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, you will then be one of God’s children and be allowed to enter Heaven and have Jesus Christ as your savior.” WOW so I sent out a twitter about it:

“I just learned that in order to be saved you have to take communion. He never said where it says that in the Bible, but im sure its in there.” OH WAIT, IT’S NOT!! You know how you become a Christian, let me tell you.

“Romans 10:9-13”
9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." 12For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. “

Or if you don’t like that, then take this one

Acts 16:29-31

29The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas. 30He then brought them out and asked, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household."

None of those have to do with crackers or wine. or baptism for that matter.

Now I did catch some flak for the things I tweeted during service and I’ll address those now.

One person stated:

“I'm not sure this is correct. In order to be saved, you must be baptized - to have the "original sin" removed from our soul. Which is why babies are baptized. We receive communion because Jesus asked that we "take this bread and eat, for this is my body; take this wine and drink, for this is my blood". We need years to understand the Catholic religion...Everyone practicing is still learning! 8-)”

The following comes from www.gotquestions.org

“The Bible is abundantly clear of what baptism is, who it is for, and what it accomplishes. In the Bible, only believers who had placed their faith in Christ were baptized - as a public testimony of their faith and identification with Him (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:3-4). Water baptism by immersion is a step of obedience after faith in Christ. It is a proclamation of faith in Christ, a statement of submission to Him, and an identification with His death, burial, and resurrection.

With this in view, infant baptism is not a Biblical practice. An infant cannot place his or her faith in Christ. An infant cannot make a conscious decision to obey Christ. An infant cannot understand what water baptism symbolizes. The Bible does not record any infants being baptized.

Baptism does not save a person. It does not matter if you were baptized by immersion, pouring, or sprinkling - if you have not first trusted in Christ for salvation, baptism (no matter the method) is meaningless and useless. Water baptism by immersion is a step of obedience to be done after salvation as a public profession of faith in Christ and identification with Him. Infant baptism does not fit the Biblical definition of baptism or the Biblical method of baptism.”

But to the point at the bottom, I’ll completely agree with that. “We need years to understand the Catholic religion...Everyone practicing is still learning!” To me this just states that there are so many rituals and rules within your faith that it needs a huge overhaul.

Here are the rules for Christianity

1.Love the Lord and Savior of mankind, Jesus Christ, as your own personal savior and follow his commandments.

2. See rule number 1.

The one thing that I did not mention of the above is the endless chanting. There was a constant call and response during the whole service. “and praise be to you” “Thanks be to God.” “and also with you.” “Praise to you, Lord, Jesus Christ.” “Glory to you, oh Lord” “Lord, hear our prayer.”

I again caught flak for this too.

“For those raised in the Catholic faith, it is not mindless repetition. I think we gain the same benefits as you gain from your church. Every individual experiences different emotions. We seek what inspires us, speaks to our heart. Isn't it funny that every religion thinks it is "THE" religion, and all others are lost?”

Now I hate to keep quoting the Bible, but it is the inerrant word of God, so here goes.

Matthew 6:7-8
7And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him."

Now I’m not saying that Catholics are pagans, far from it, but what I am saying is that prayer is not a ritual. Rather, it is personal conversation between you and God. It is not the length of the prayer that makes it effective, but the sincerity of heart, the depth of faith. "Christians' prayers are measured by weight, not by length." Don't bore God with many words, but no heart! (www.scripturestudies.com)

When I was hearing these people pray at this church, I couldn’t honestly say that God was there. I know that may sound harsh but the point I’m making is that if your prayers sound like they are hurting you, STOP DOING THEM! It’s a slap in God’s face to just be going through the motions and checking the boxes. If you’re going to pray, do it with zeal and heart or don’t do it at all.

All this being said, I know I’ve made some people rather upset with me today but you know what, I looked at today’s experience through biblical lenses and what I saw is what I saw. If you can argue for anything I saw today with SCRIPTURE, let me know I’d love to see it. I was not judging any person in that building today, nor am I saying that my way is the right way, but what I am saying is that if the Christian faith is based upon the Bible and I saw and heard things today that are not in there, then it’s simply not something I can follow.

L’Chayim,
-Ryan

A response to Mere Christianity

About a month ago I posted an article about my disliking to the C.S. Lewis book "Mere Christianity" you can read that post here.

and for the first time in a long while I'm going to repost a comment left by one of you lovely readers. so without further ado, here's Joel.

Hey Ryan,

I don't read your blog, but Rady tagged this post. I'm a huge CS Lewis fan, mainly from the standpoint that I'm a reason/logic guy and most of his writings use that approach.

Your points are solid. I've been reading his work for a long time and thought I might offer a perspective on some of this that comes from reading his other works as well.

1. He can be very long winded. Just because he's held in high regard doesn't mean he says things simply. I do often read his books when I intended to fall asleep. I still learn a great deal from him.

2. The Apostle Paul wasn't married either, and in fact uses much the same disclaimer in 1 Cor 7 when speaking about such things. We would still consider his teachings very thoroughly (God's Word afterall, right?).

3. I've long disagreed with CSL on his stance of evolution. The Problem Of Pain is another great work of his. But he says some really outlandish things that really end up sounding more like a man searching for truth while confidently stating things he isn't really sure of. After considering this for a while I realized that he was born in an era when science really was starting to take off. Creationism was being challenged, and there really wasn't an antidote or clear response from the Christian community. He was a man of logic and to that point his scholarly friends and influences were bringing seemingly logical arguments for which there was no better, more "logical" Christian response. He was bound by the limits of the knowledge he had to work with. I wonder if he'd have a much different view of things if he were alive today.

4. Lastly, to your point about scripture. He rarely ever uses scripture to back up his arguments, especially in Mere Christianity. I liken this to someone using the color green to describe the color green to someone who has never seen green. If you are an atheist or a "normal person" and you don't believe the validity of the Bible, using scripture to describe truth is going to seem really inadequate, and maybe even comical. He uses other approaches to reveal that the Bible, more importantly God, is who He really is. If you want solid Biblical teaching to back up what you believe, there are many many other authors who approach things from a scriptural context. He doesn't often intend to reach the reached. His writing, as I've viewed it, is intended to reach those who view scripture very skeptically.

So overall, I don't disagree with your observations. He was after all just a man. He was flawed. I see a lot of his approach in myself. I often times must make a "confident" argument known to then begin disassembling it in my own mind to make sure it can be stated as confidently as I originally presented it.

Just because it is old, doesn’t make it good.

Over the past couple of weeks I have sent out several tweets ( www.twitter.com/Ryan Lewis ) about my disliking of C.S. Lewis’ “Mere Christianity” and in doing so have been scolded about the fact that I should bite my tongue when ripping into a book deemed a “classic” and “staple” of the Christian faith. Well below is my response to that. No low blows, no animosity, just my humble opinion.


C.S. Lewis is known as one of the most honored and well respected authors and Christian writers of all time, and to a degree I agree with that. Books like “The Screwtape Letters” and the Chronicles of Narnia books series are both well known and widely regarded (I personally love the former)

That being said I STRUGGLED to finish “Mere Christianity.” Mere Christianity is one of if not his most well known books on the Christian faith. The book begins from the perspective of someone who is not of the faith or who I’ll be referring to as normal people, and states that all people or born with a sense of right and wrong and that this inherent law of nature is given to everyone by God. He then supposes that once we become aware of this fact then we are then given the choice to join or turn away from God, and that it is our choice but that God will influence this decision as he wants to draw us into his family.

There are several things that I did like in this book, such as what he believes is Man interpretation of God, he mentions how men will try to find happiness in anything outside of God until they have nothing left but God. He also explains at length the basics of the Christian faith and what most Christians believe. He also makes a lot of valid points so that if one was new to the faith or was interested in learning about it, they would have a lot to take away from it.

That being said this book is LONG! And I don’t mean long in the sense of word count (my copy was a only 225 pages) no the book is long in the sense that Lewis takes four pages to write what someone else could say in two paragraphs. He takes long drawn out examples to explain analogies that are so daunting that by the time you get done reading them, you want to take a nap.

The second big gripe I had with the book was the fact that he spends the better part of 30 pages speaking on something he has no basis for offering his input. Let me paraphrase, “I’ve never been married, but for the next two chapters I’m going to tell you what’s best for your marriage.” he even states something to this effect in the begin of the chapter. If you’ve never been married, don’t tell me how I should be married.

My biggest concern with this book is the lack of biblical context and example. As I mentioned above in the chapter about christian marriage he states thing that go directly against the bible, which is THE source of christian doctrine. Below is one such example that goes against everything I have learned about what Christ taught.

“If people do not believe in permanent marriage, it is perhaps better that they should live together unmarried than that they should make vows they do not mean to keep. It is true that by living together without marriage they will be guilty (in christian eyes) of fornication. But one fault is not mended by adding another: unchasitiy is not improved by adding perjury.”

WOW WOW WOW, why the heck did I even get married in the first place then ole C.S.!!! I could have just shacked up with Megan and ruled the roost without ever having to worry about the consequences. What bible is this guy reading!?!?!

He also states things like “it’s ok to like some people and not others, that’s human nature” FALSE! as followers of Christ we are to show love and compassion to everyone, especially those may require a little extra grace. Also at the end of the book he basically endorses evolution and states that all humans will eventually evolve to follow after God.

Oh, and I wont even get into the part about aliens.

The final complaint I have is this: lack of scripture. When you presenting an argument for a faith based upon Gods love and what he has done for us, as he shows us through scripture, point that out. After all he did leave us instructions. Hardly at all through the book is the Bible quoted and when it is there is no reference or citation given. If you want to point people to Christ, there are a few examples you can give them. One of the most important ones being the Bible. Without the Bible the Christian faith lacks authenticity and validation, use it Lewis, use it.

All this being said I still think the book is important and that it could bring about a lot of discussion amongst people. I understand that this book has helped a lot of people with their faith, I just think that there are better books out there that can accomplish the same thing a lot more thoroughly and more accurately. If you’ve read the book or would like to share your opinion, please do so, I would love to see a dialogue opened due to this post.

A personal update

So I want to apologize to everyone for the lack of updates on the site. Things have been kind of hectic in Lewis land. I moved offices, so I’m no longer downtown. Megan and I have been getting all of our financial affairs in order so that we can start the process of saving for a house. I’ve started working out regularly (I’ll post more about this in the coming days and weeks.)
Megan’s birthday is today, wish her happy birthday and I’ll post some pics of her big day soon.

L'Chayim,
-Ryan

A Lurker I’d love to meet.

This post is going out so someone exclusively in the mid-mid west. I’m not talking about Ohio or Indy or anywhere this close I’m talking to the person in Kansas or Nebraska or Oklahoma that loves the site. I know you’re out there, I can see you. You visit the site way to much not to be posting your opinions of things.
Let yourself be known. I’d love to do an interview with you. One that could actually stay up on the site without anyone bitching like a little girl about it. So please get in contact with me, if you’d prefer not to post a comment, email me at lilking783@gmail.com

Open Mouth insert Foot

Dear Celia,
I'm an asshole. Plain and simple. I shot my mouth off before thinking.Ii realized that once I posted my reaction that the only people who read my blog are people who know me, and no one I know deserves to be call an idiot. So please accept my sincere apology and for the record you're on pace to win 20 of the 30 dollars, subscribe to the feed and you can donate the money to the Jerry Lewis telethon, or ice cream whichever. so in summation, I'm retarded please still love me.

-Ryan

P.S. on a completely unrelated note, DUG learn how to spell ridiculous, ya idiot.

The voice of reason

So I felt the need to respond to this the moment I read it. I finally get someone to leave a comment, and as I’ve stated in the past I will respond to any comment left but I felt I should be especially hasty in responding to this one.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Who doesn't love money":

Why wouldn't you just give $30 to someone or something (an organization or what have you) who really needs it?



First and foremost the word that makes me so pissed I could scream is the first word I read, Anonymous. Now I understand if you don’t have a Google account so it wont show your real name but all you have to do to alleviate that is this.

Sincerely,
-Whoeveriam

Secondly and more importantly what gives you the right to tell me what I should or shouldn’t do with my money. How do you know what amount of money I give to people or organizations each year. You know why wouldn’t know, because you never asked you smart ass. I give substantial amounts of money to organizations like RadioU and Inner City Impact each year, you can also ask people I know that I tend to be the guy giving money to the homeless dude downtown who comes up to ask for it. So don’t question what I do with my money, its mine. I worked for it and if I want to pile it all up, slide down it and then set it on fire, so be it, I can do that.

Third, the point of doing it the way i'm doing is to get people to post and to get their freinds and family to read, is to entice them with cold hard cash. looks like it backfired on me because the only person who posted hates the idea of free money.

Finally you an idiot. Because If you would have left your name, you could have won at least 20 of the 30 dollars and then gone to the pound and saved a puppy from the gas chamber. Good on ya.

L’Chayim,
-Ryan


----------------
Now playing: Lamb Of God - Omerta
via FoxyTunes

Who doesn't love money

In my seeming rather futile quest to garner attention from the billions of people on the Internet and to get some type of back and forth dialog on this machine I’ve created I realized I’m going about it the wrong way. I’ve always hoped that people liked what I’ve had to say and that’s why you visit the blog and vote or leave a comment or whatever, but I now realize that’s completely wrong. You go to the blog hoping to find something you can relate to. We’ll I’ve been thinking about what everyone can relate to and this is what I’ve come up with:

1. Money

2. Sex

3. Pizza

4. A hatred of Canadians (they’re to nice not to be up to something)

We’re all slaves to the dollar in some shape or form, so here's how its going to be. between now and August 15th I will be giving away 30 dollars. thats right a real twenty dollars. 10 bucks will go to the person who posts the most comments between now and August 15th. the other 10 bucks will go to one person who posts a comment on a random blog of my choosing. you can back post on the blog, so go back through the archives and post on some old stuff. The last 10 dollars will go to one select person who clicks the little button in the corner to subscribe to the feed. When you subscribe kill two birds with one stone and post a comment saying you subscribed.

What this also means is that one ambitious person can win all three contests. Also Megan (who I decided to put on the payroll as a regular) and I will be posting ATLEAST ten new blogs between now and August 15th. Please post so you can take my money, Ya Jerks.

L'Chayim,
-Ryan

Someone is Wasting their 15 minutes and it ain't Me

This weeks post comes from Kyle Freaking Borton (the lone voice of
the masses who repond to this EPIC blog)

Kyle writes:

ACTUALLY RYAN....

You were a tad bit off in your math on this one, and me being a math
major and OCD out the ass, I had to do this problem...

The actual length between the 2 airports in 2414 miles straight line,
but with flight patterns mixed in (these would typically go up amost
to Canada ), we could say right around 3100 miles, and that's if the
flight patterns are basically identical.

Now, with the plane coming from Seattle at 500mph, a normal 6.2 hour
filght would be cut about 1.1 hours shorter by the jet stream from
being up north further. so we will say around 5.1 hour flight.

The JFK plane traveling 650mph would have right around a 4.75 hour
flight; but the jet stream and the winds from the great lakes, we
would have to add around 1.3 hours; so around a 6.05 hour flight.


Now, looking at the flight patterns, the only place the 2 planes
could possibly collide is around the Iron River/Crystal Falls, Michigan area ( Upper Pennisula ). Stupid Michigan . No one should
live there anyways. BUT back to the point... For the planes to
collide here, the one departing from Seattle would have to leave
about 25-30 minutes before the one from JFK.

SO the answer to that question is "nowhere. They would not hit each
other if they left at the same time."
Yes, It's retarded that I just worked this all out. But I had to
prove you wrong on that front. Oh, and you owe me a sweet prize.

The sweet prize that Kyle is referring to is my Marital thesis I
posted May 10th ( you can find it in the archives) where i stated the
following

"Whoever finds the hidden message, post it in the comments, and you’ll win a prize, a for real prize."

Well the real prize that I was going to present to the winner was a
whole blog post dedicated to them. Well guess what Kyle, since you
had to be such a smart-ass and go and correct me, congratulations,
this is your big expose, link this to your facebook so that everyone
can see your such a big internet celebrity. Chocolate rain and 2
girls 1 cup has got nothing on you. Ya Dick.

L'Chayim
-Ryan

Sucks to be Them

In my never ending response to answer every reader question that is submitted, today’s question comes from Turdtsar, who writes.

"My question is this: If a plane left Seattle flying at 500MPH and another left New York flying at 650MPH where exactly would they crash into each other? I really need to know so I will not be in that location."

Well that’s a great question Turd. I did some math and have come up with the following calculations.

The plane leaving Seattle traveling at 500 mph, it would take approximately 5.5 hours to reach New York, but if we factor in the jet stream we can call it an even 5 hours.

The plane leaving New York traveling at 650 mph would take approximately 4.5 hours to reach Seattle, but again factoring in the jet stream we’ll say it’s an even 5 hours.

It’s 2,880 from JFK airport in New York to Seattle international, and traveling at the same speed, this leads me to believe that they would crash almost dead (haha) in the middle of their routes. Approximately 1,440 miles from Seattle is Sioux City, Iowa. So to finally answer your question

If a plane left Seattle flying at 500MPH and another left New York flying at 650MPH they would crash into each other in Sioux City Iowa.


I hope this helped you Turd and all you other readers. Now if any one has any questions like, “what career path should I chose?” or “How do I get a girl to like me?” or “ how do I stop wetting the bed?” please email me at lilking783@gmail.com or post a comment.
So in summation, if you had planned on traveling to Sioux City any time soon, don’t. and if you live in Sioux City Iowa, sucks to me you, move, God forgot about you people a long time ago.

L’chayim,

-Ryan