This is my second blog.

My first blog chronicled my experiences over three years caring for my dad as he lived through and finally died from Alzheimer's. That is the book that is for sale.

This second blog kind of chronicles of life, what it is like to start your life over in your late 50's. After caretaking, you are damaged, file bankruptcy, and the world doesn't care what you did. After 8 months of unemployment, you wake each day knowing the world doesn't want you. Finally you do find a job, 5 weeks before homelessness, but doing what you did 30 years ago and getting paid what you did 30 years ago. So this is starting over.

The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.

Monday, February 8, 2016


As a little kid going to a methodist church, there were many issues that bothered me when reading the Bible and one of them was when I read some of Paul's letters, I couldn't shake the feeling or thought that 'huh, that's not right'.  By right, I meant that it seems to contradict.

And, in the wisdom of a teen decided just to stop believing in God entirely.

Fortunately, God brought me back.  But I still could not shake the issue of Paul.

Now, what I am about to say is dangerous territory.  No matter what christian church you might belong, there is this list of things that it believes and almost every one starts out with 1. The Bible is the inerrant word of God and everything in it is true.

But, what if it's not?  What if in this great battle between God and Satan, outlined in Job and Genesis, do you really think Satan would sit back and just let a 100% Word of God survive centuries?  If Satan could get to Judas, is it possible Satan got to people who picked the books for the NT; scribes who copied, translators, etc?  Did Satan successfully pollute the NT with false doctrine?  After all the criticism Peter took in Paul's letters, did Peter really put in 2nd Peter 3:15 that comment about Paul's letters or was that added later.  Take 1/2 the previous verse out and 3:15 and the paragraph actually flows and makes better sense.

Take it from this: if the Bible is 100% no mistakes fact, then would their be contradictions?  Let's focus NT here my few remaining imaginary readers.  So let me ask who was chosen to be the prophet or apostle to the Gentiles?  How many of you said Paul?  Let me see your hands.....  Okay, you are right, the Bible says Paul is the apostle who will preach to the Gentiles.  How many of you said Peter?  Keep those hands up.... Okay, and you are right, in the Book of Acts, Peter is the apostle selected to preach the gospel to the Gentiles.

Hmmm.  Is this a problem?  Peter, in Acts, is the apostle who is suppose to go out and preach to the gentiles, Peter is not writing Acts mind you.  But Paul claims several times in letters he is writing that HE is the apostle to the gentiles.  And if you read Paul's letters you will find Paul is not a fan of Peter and makes several attempts to slap Peter down.

Same Peter that was chosen by that bloke Jesus to be in the inner circle of disciples of the Son of God.  Yea, that Peter.

One way Paul slaps Peter down is over eating food sacrificed to false gods.  Well, I mean in over the idea of eating food sacrificed to false idols, not overeating.  Peter, James and the other disciples say it is a big no no, never eat.  Paul, on the other hand, says there is no issue since we know no such false god actually exists, what's the big deal, it's a meaningless thing and the only reason NOT to eat it is if you are with a 'weaker' follower of Paul, I mean Christ, then you shouldn't until that person is as wise as you.

Hmmm, so who is right?  Well, if you read those seven letters to the seven churches in Revelation, one of those churches is being slapped down by Jesus for.......  any guesses...... yes, eating foods sacrificed to false gods and idols.

And that is where you start wondering, start thinking - which is always dangerous - and start reading and realize if you pay very close attention to what Jesus says, what James says, what Peter says, what John says and compare them to what Paul says in Galatians or Corinthians, you see two entirely different philosophies or theologies being taught.

And then the walls come tumbling down.

Most churches, most pastors today teach Paulinian Christianity.  And in doing so ignore what or explain away what is said in James, Jude, Hebrews, John, Peter, Matthew, Luke, and Mark.

Don't take my word for this and don't mention this to your pastor.  Holy moly, don't tell your pastor.  For if this is true, that Paul is not whom we are told, if Paul is not right, then millions of Christians have been taught a false gospel.  Pastors won't like to think about the idea that everything they learned every thing they preaches is just wrong.  And the truth is Paulinian Christianity is easy.  It does not take a lot of effort, it does not take a lot of commitment, say a prayer, you are saved, try to behave.

And remember what happened to Paul.  He was about to get whipped and rather than trust God he trusted his Roman citizenship and stopped the whipping so he could be tried in Rome where, they cut off his head instead.  Lesson there.

But I can't shake this feeling that when I read Matthew, John, Jude, James, Hebrews, Peter, Revelation, I get this feeling in me that is not there when I read Corinthians, Romans, Thess, etc.  When I read the latter, I only have this feeling that something is not right.

The consequences, oh my head reels.  Salvation by grace alone.  Once saved always saved.  What if that is false?  So I quietly, well till now, read the first 5 books, skip to hebrews and james, then jump to john, peter, jude and revelation now.  And I avoid Paul's epistles.

Or what if on Judgement Day I am met at the gates with Jesus and his arm is around a man and Jesus says "this is my brother Paul, got anything to say before he kicks you ass all the way to Hell?"