I’m not attacking religion, really. I’m just telling you all what I thought, as a kid and growing up, based on what I was told about God, Jesus, the whole Judeo thing.

I will admit to a certain vindictiveness, however. Religious people, when you don’t agree with them, are often condescending, judgmental and downright mean. But I’ve never seen an atheist look like this

simply because you don’t believe what s/he believes. Perhaps this

but come on, that’s not as bad.

So I do get a little pleasure out of ribbing back at the judgmental and mean.

Ok, that said, uh…one of the first things I questioned about my faith was transubstantiation. That’s when the priest blesses bread (tasteless cardboardy wafers) and wine (often grape juice) and it becomes the body and blood of Christ.

Fist of all, really?

What’s this, another magic spell?

Setting aside the question that this begs, i.e. why the hell are Christians so violently opposed to Harry Potter (yet not so much the Lord of The Rings series), do we really believe this happens, that this nasty cracker is Jesus’ body? That this wine is Jesus’ blood? Come on. Ever cut your finger and suck the blood? Did the stuff at church ever taste like that?

And does Jesus taste like chicken? (I defer to my non-vegetarian friends.)

And secondively, what the hell’s the point? Why do we reenact the blood letting, cannibalistic pagan ritual Jesus describes in John 6:53? “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.” Aren’t the Christians against paganism and cannibalism?

Funny how Protestants criticize Catholics for their adherence to this ritual, particularly for centering their entire faith on it, yet they (Protestants) still practice it, though less frequently than Catholics. Well, Jesus did say to do it, sort of. (Luke 22:19) Here he was talking about breaking bread and having wine at Passover, not feasting on human flesh and blood. But that’s for the experts to work out.

What experts, you ask? The same bible scholars who couldn’t consistently answer the question of whether transubstantiation was to be taken literally. As many priests - priests, not lay people* - as I asked, that’s how many different answers I got.

Again, what’s going on here?

*Lay people are non-clergy, sort of like muggles.