WWJD -- Who Would Jesus Do?

Even a heathen like me thinks there is some truth in the bible, namely the verse about not judging others for fear of being judged.

Having said that, I was on the website www.sexinchrist.com the other day and I thought this would be a perfect time to discuss it.

Don't worry why I was there, I was just there, OK?

Here's a brief trip through the chapters of the site.

Ready?

I actually doubt it, but anyway:

"Threesomes Within a Christian Marriage"

"Anal Sex and God's Will"

"A Proposal for a Christian Pornography"

Curious? Still willing to press on? Good, here are few excerpts

"for a young woman who has never engaged in sexual intercourse, having anal sex allows her to preserve her virginity (i.e., maintain an intact hymen) until marriage. There is no greater gift that a bride can give than to offer her pure, unsullied maidenhead to her husband on their wedding night."

You hear that ladies? God wants you to give your man anal. If only to perserve your precious, precious virginity.

Ready for another?

"Aside from swallowing semen as a measure to prevent the waste and spillage of seed, ingesting ejaculate can have spiritual benefits."

I mean, I've heard Christianity used to prove a LOT of things -- slavery, homophobia, Obama as the antichrist -- but even I was taken a back by this site. There's agenda and then there's agenda.

Dude, if you want to validate your sexual kinks, look to Hindu and the Kama Sutra. Not the fucking Bible.

Naturally, you'd think I'd be all in for a sexual misreading of the bible, but even I have a limit on bullshit and this site, my friends, is bullshit.

I've read the bible (well, most of it) and there's not a lot of justification for anal sex in there, nor gangbangs. Methinks the authors of sexinchrist.com are trying to prove something to themselves -- that their kinky ways are somehow supported by their Puritanical upbringings.

Look, if you want to justify your proclivity for threesomes via the New Testament, I say more power to you. But just don't expect the rest of us to buy it.

Oh, and to answer the question the title of this blog asks (Who Would Jesus Do?) -- according to sexinchrist.com, it would be a woman who's into porn, threesomes, anal and/or oral sex.

Soooo, I'm gonna guess Jada Fire. Yes, Jesus would totally do porn star Jada Fire. Here's her not-safe-for-work profile.

Don't think she's HIS type? Check out this shocking video:


via videosift.com

Some Conjurer of Cheap Tricks

I am a wizard.

I know I've never mentioned it before, but really it just came up yesterday.

It was a beautiful day in suburban Maryland so the whole fam was outside chilling and inevitably, we ended up across the street with my daughters' best friends -- the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Now, my children know that I am a wizard and ask me to do tricks all the time -- namely pushing a crayon (or something else small enough to conceal in my hand) into my ear and pulling it out of one of their ears.

So yesterday, my youngest (who has no idea that Jehovah Witnesses abhor magic almost as much as birthday parties) asked me to conjure up my famous trick right in front of the four kids across the street -- the same four kids who go to Kingdom Hall every week and occasionally ask me if I "know Jesus."

Needless to say, they were enthralled! After they saw me push a purple Crayola into my ear and pull it out of my youngest's nose, they all became fans/heretics. Suddenly, they were all lining up to be my next partner in blasphemy. Soon I was pulling crayons out of ears, noses and underarms, seranded by a chorus of "oohs" and "aahhs" from the children.

Their mother, a lovely woman who I genuinely like, sat quietly observing and piping up only to nervously say "Oh, kids. They believe anything at this age."

Which is true. Very true. Namely, that a virgin could give birth or a man could live in the stomach of a whale for three days and three nights (sounds like a time share pitch doesn't it?). I mean, if a cheap parlor trick makes you worry about your children's theological future or makes you question your faith, I would consider getting a maintenance plan the next time you go to chur . . .er Kingdom Hall.

"The Shack" Attack

Ok, ok, it's on.

Perhaps she didn't know it, but yesterday, in my kitchen, my mother-in-law threw down the theological gauntlet.

"You know you should read 'The Shack,'" she offered, putting on the best imitation of nonchalance I've seen in a while.

This all started because I was asking questions about becoming a deacon, something my mother-in-law is studying for at the moment. This segued into a general conversation about religion, of which she knows I have none.

And that's when she fired off her literary suggestion. But suggesting I read "The Shack" is like telling your fat friend to read something by Richard Simmons. It's less of a recommendation and more of a threat, it's a taunt to change your ways. I realize you don't know me, but I don't cotton to threats too kindly --- so I reckon I'ma read that book (sorry, intellectual challenges make me talk like Old West prospecters). Today I am going to the library to go get "The Shack" and you lovely readers should expect regular updates as I read it and share my excellent thoughts.

But before I start with my weeks long review, you should get a little background.

Here's what I know about "The Shack."

1. I almost picked it up last summer because I thought it was a Dean R. Koontz book (if you see the cover, you'd understand).

2. My main man Hank Hannegraf (radio's Bible Answer Man) does NOT dig the book, saying it made him "more than just a little queasy." Now, considering that I only like Hank in an ironic way (see my earlier post about him), I'm not sure how to take his criticism but there you go.

Honestly, I'm not expecting much from "The Shack," mostly because all the Christian fiction I've read or seen is just really bad (remind me to tell you about the failed "Left Behind" experiment of 1999 -- I got six pages in before hitting eject). I understand that Christian fiction are morality plays, but do they have to FEEL like morality plays, much less plays for fifth graders?

I point to Kirk Cameron to make my point:

Take this scene from "Fireproof," Kirk's latest God-happy flick about a fireman trying to save his marriage. If only I could figure out what I'm supposed to learn from this scene.



Anyway, you get the picture. My expectations are low, but I'm willing to read -- especially because it's free. Honestly, at this point, the only thing I'm dreading more than reading the book is going to the library to get it. It's like going to the porn store where you are firmly judged as one of THOSE kinds of people. I realize I don't owe everyone an explanation but I feel like I need to tell the librarian "I'm only reading this book to snark all over it, not because I need enlightenment."

Hmm, maybe I'll just print it on my t-shirt -- "I Read Christian Literature For My Blog." Consider it done.

Why Heathens Are Responsible for Evil

Guilty Admission: I listen to Evangelical radio. A LOT of it. I'm not quite sure why as I have no interest in being "saved" (an irritating term that I'm sure most Christians don't know adds to the perception that they are pompous condescending)by Jesus or any of his friends, but where else can I go to listen to folks who honestly believe witches are REAL threats and that the end of the world is coming? Since I don't attend the third grade anymore, my only option is WAVA in the Washington DC area where every weeknight during my drive home I get to hear the Bible Answer Man, some dude named Hank.

Now, before I commence to snarking I DO have to give him props for making fun of Juanita Bynum. For those that don't know (and I was one of you two months ago), Ms. Bynum is a pastor who was in the news after her perfect marriage dissolved into alleged abuse and rape. Ok, that's not why she deserves being made fun of. But have you ever heard this woman before? She starts speaking in tongues and screaming at the top of her voice and ending each utterance with "and-uh." I mean, I guess she's no different than many other Black ministers but the clip Hank played of her made her sound like a fool. Click here for some that old-timey preachin'.

Anyway, one day Hank (or BAM, as I know him) was talking about the great scam of demon posession and exorcism. So, naturally to hear a man of Christ dispel the myth of demon posession was of great interest to me. Little did I know BAM would soon be pointing his judgmental finger through my radio at me. He went on to say that while demon posession is real (shucks!), those who believe in Jesus cannot be posessed by the devil. He went on to justify through some verses which ultimately lost me but it was the equivalent of "this town ain't big enough for the both us." So who, might you ask, CAN be posessed by the devil? According to BAM, only NON-believers.

I'll let you stew on that for a minute.

Done?

Ok, so by this logic, while I do not personally believe that Lord Voldemort is real I COULD concieveably be possessed by him -- just like the guy who had old Volde's head under his turban in the first Harry Potter movie. But the difference between myself and Prof. Quirrel (didn't think I could pull that name did you?) is that He is a fictional character who also believes in the power of another fictional character Lord Voldemort. Wheras I am a real person who knows Voldemort, Harry and the mythical country of England are all figments of J.K. Rowling's billion dollar imagination.

Seems to me BAM has it backwards. ONLY those who believe in God, and thus the devil, could be posessed by either. I fear many things in life: dying in a plane crash, not living long enough to see the new Batman movie but demon posession never crossed my mind mainly because I don't believe in demons. And I would guess, statistically, the number of demon posessions of non-believers is pretty low compared to those who think the devil is real.

Just a thought, not a sermon. (Oh yea, that comes from another radio show I hear/loathe).