Books and Snark (and Too Many Parentheses)

Well isn't that just like me. I started a new blog, post twice in three days, then go a week and a half without writing anything relevant. Oops. But in my defense, that includes Thanksgiving Break...

Also, this blog has a meaner tone than usual, even though I was my usual mixture of confused and amused at christians' reactions to different things. But my confusion seems to have manifested itself as snark. I can't figure out how to tell the same story "nicely" so read with caution. Also, spoiler warning for the Twilight "Saga" and Fifty Shades, little bits of each. Each is so notorious that I doubt these "spoilers" will surprise anyone, but I'm giving warning now in case anyone cares.

Anyways, since I go to a Christian school, lunch conversation turns into blog fodder. Today for instance. I ate with four friends. Two know I am dating a girl, AND that I'm atheist, which I very hesitantly share around here. Another is the subject of today's amusement (we will call this person Friend because any identifying information to go along with my teasing would be mean), and the last came in mid-conversation and didn't say much. (Yes, it is unusual that everyone at the table is someone I consider a friend. It's usually a diverse crowd with some of the same people in the mix.) For whatever reason, shortly after I sat down we wound up talking about books. Friend admitted to reading Twilight and commented on the social expectation of being teased for that, which actually none of us tried, though we weren't really left the time to do so. I shared what trivia I know about the series, and conversation continued. When the fourth book came up, which, in case you didn't know, includes a sex scene AFTER the marriage scene. For some reason, Friend freaked out that it included a sex scene at all and then started ranting about Fifty Shades of Grey. "I read the Wikipedia article..." After the first wave of detail-less fury (about how wrong and different it is) I tried to lighten the mood by mentioning that it was so different but it was just someone else's idea of how the world is, I got nearly wordless rage in return, with no more detail than before. I agreed that it was not worth reading, and stated that the only part I actually liked was that they broke up in the end. And I was agreeing with my friend! I was trying to agree and inspire Friend to act calmer, since I wasn't going to get any rational discussion out of the topic, but that agreement only provoked another outburst. One of the friends who knows me better tried to reassure me later that Friend was just very anti-secular and reacted that way to lots of things in the "world." I'm not upset at being basically shouted down, especially because of the reminder that Christians who can't handle anything worldly are honestly quite pathetic. They want to be "in the world, not of the world" but can't handle that people have different standards or priorities or "ethics" (I wouldn't usually classify BDSM or other kinks as defining a moral standard, but if you're referring to the ethic of not hating others for their interests, that does seem to be contrary to christian culture...) Good luck surviving in the world, Friend. Because if you can't handle that a book you will never have to read exists, life is going to be unnecessarily stressful in many ways.

Semantics and Illogic

Okay, so here's a story from Monday night, I've just been slow about typing it up. For some reason, a new physics professor was sitting with my friends at our usual dinner table, so I joined them. Didn't think much of it. I don't remember how exactly it came up, but I wound up mentioning that my bible class teaches me all the ways I'm a heretic, and generally making fun of the class, like I do in this blog except in life I'm not so openly atheist. When asked for an example of what I meant, I explained my favorite, most ridiculous example. I am a heretic because I believe Jesus had one, combined nature. (notice I'm still allowing for the orthodox belief that he was both human and divine). From my point of view, even though he has two otherwise mutually exclusive traits (the perfection of divinity and all the imperfections of humanity) if he acts on them in a consistent proportion, then for all intents and purposes, he has one nature. He is predictable. That is the understood use of the word nature in most other contexts that refer to personality. And usually, the explanation I get is that I cannot deny that he was both human and divine and those are the natures that I am counting and I cannot say they are combined because that is impossible because they are so different.

For some reason, in the middle of explaining this to my friend, the physics prof decided to explain to me the error in my reasoning in the same dogmatic terms I always hear from preachers. We can't understand god. His natures are completely separate. I argued that even though I might at different times present myself as Kara the student or Kara the daughter, my nature was the same. I still avoid conflict as much as possible. I still have a healthy amount of respect for authority coupled with a general unwillingness to take orders. I have the same nature and I act consistently. Jesus acted consistently. One nature. So Mr. Stranger Prof tried to explain to me that in twenty years when I'm married, sometimes my nature as a wife and my nature as a mother will come into conflict and I will have to prioritize my husband versus my children. So many problems with that, mostly because of his assumptions, and a little on the logic:

One, I won't have a husband, I am strongly likely to marry my current girlfriend.

Two, I won't bear our children, she will (we've already agreed on this).

Three, I will never have to choose between a spouse and my children. She is not shallow enough to threaten to leave over anything involving our children, nor to kick them out and I wouldn't still be dating her if she was anything like that. If she and our hypothetical children are all sick, I'll exhaust myself taking care of them all. If they are arguing, I'm a peacemaker. I value peace and everyone getting along. I will work towards that goal which is not choosing one over the other.

Four, his point works a lot better for arguing that I have two natures as a fallible human being than it does for arguing that the perfect son of god who has the ability to be perfectly consistent has two natures.

Yet this is the illogic of Christianity. I'm a heretic, among other reasons, because I insist on using standard definitions of terms. I do not try to deny Jesus' humanity, and for the sake of my Christian friends, I talk from the philosophical perspective of when I was a Christian, so I do not deny his divinity. Those are what I would consider the important points yet even if I were a Christian, that tiny detail where I get in trouble because the church invented its own definition, makes me a heretic.

Hmm. That might be a better name for this blog. "The Happy Heretic"... Thoughts?

Honest Christianity

Thursday, in my bible class, my teacher said that to try to apply logic to the bible "is to do it an injustice"

This sums up in one perfect quote all of my issues with christianity. I have a math brain. I can't live without logic. But at least my teacher agrees with me that the bible can't be logically studied and understood. We just draw opposite conclusions from that fact. I decided that an illogical document shouldn't run my life so I no longer care about its implications, while my teacher obviously decided that since it can't be understood, the dogma should be studied more so it's at least understood in some way, since it's somehow still relevant.

So maybe I'm a little crazy for continuing to go to school here when I'm taught such insanity as reasonable "truth." Among other reasons, it means I always have something to laugh at.

Incidentally, I won't usually have a specific date to point to while telling my stories, because I have lots of places in my notes marked "blog post!" and I will address them all in time.

Introductions

Hey everyone. I'm starting a new blog and while a few friends might follow me over from my old blog, it's still worth introducing myself. My name is Kara. I am an atheist at a Christian college. The second of mandatory bible classes was what convinced me Christianity was not something I could believe in. Now I've always been one to disprove stereotypes, so I don't want to be just another angry atheist. Instead I choose to be amused by the stupidity I encounter in the following bible classes and on other occasions when people discuss Christianity as undeniable truth. I've been meaning to start this blog for a while, but something said the other day in class was so perfect I couldn't help but share. But that will go in its own post. Funny quotes should outshine narcissism, not the other way around.

In any case, welcome, readers.