John Branyan (Hee/Hee/Hee)

This Update Changed Everything! open.substack.com/pub/johnbranya…

I'm beginning to think the Government doesn't want my opinion about the war. They're relying on intelligence reports, military analysts, satellite surveillance, logistics experts, foreign policy advisors, historians, economists, and battlefield commanders. And nobody from Washington has reached out to ask how the war makes me feel. For the record: I don't like it. War makes me unhappy. I really dislike violence. I really, really, really dislike human suffering. I wish violence and suffering would never happen. When war breaks out, I really want it to stop. The people waging war apparently don't know it's horrible. Generals don't know. Soldiers don't know. Diplomats don't know. So it's up to me to let the people in the middle of the conflict know that war is bad. Cynics may ask, "Should a person who cannot negotiate peace at Thanksgiving dinner be lecturing nuclear powers about de-escalation?" My answer is, "Of course!" I've never personally been in a war. That makes me an expert in conflict avoidance. It's pretty simple, really. Just don't fight. When another country starts shooting rockets or dropping bombs or massacring civilians, ask them to stop. Tell them that we disapprove of violence. We must remember that people around the globe all share our American values. Everybody wants freedom, democracy, justice, and equality. Nobody really wants to be a tyrant! Dictators just need to be reminded, "When you oppress people, they don't want to be your friend." While waiting for the government to contact me, I'll keep expressing my ignorant opinions as an outside observer. Posting simplistic moral slogans gives me a feeling of wisdom without the burden of understanding. I don't need to study history, or understand military strategy, or choose between decisions that will both result in loss of life. I just need to say I feel sad. (Proverbs 18:2) A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions. #israeliranuswar

@Devon_Eriksen_ @ChoochSkookum Atheists are funny because they believe thousands of years of philosophy and theology can be dismissed as special pleading.

@ChoochSkookum Monotheists are funny, because they don't realize the existence of a single creator god requires another god to create him, who requires another god to create him, and so on. All roads lead to an infinite regress of countless gods.

Polytheists are funny because they dont realize the existence of multiple gods requires a singular Creator God. Otherwise who created them? It shows they stopped short in their thought process All roads lead to a singular Creator.

There is a belief among some groups that comedy has no rules. These folks insist there are no guidelines, no boundaries, no restrictions. Comedy gives you the freedom to say whatever you want without restraint. They’ve mistaken freedom of expression for anarchy. As soon as I say, “There are no rules in comedy,” I’ve stated a comedy rule.1 I’m trying to be charitable (because I want to be treated charitably), so I think the “no rules” people are trying to say, “Comedy should be uncensored.” I agree with that. Sort of. Censorship is a necessary step in all communication. Without it, you wouldn’t know what a conversation is about. I’m writing about censorship, which required censoring the topics of whittling, raisin muffins, and disc golf. We can’t talk about everything at once. Whelp! There’s another rule. As delightful as it may be to imagine comedy as a realm of boundless liberty where ideas run completely free, that’s not reality. I’m only able to talk about raisin muffins after I’ve censored all the non-muffin talk away. So the question is not whether your ideas will be censored. The question is who does the censoring and when.2 Still trying to be charitable, I assume the “no rules” people mean that comedy can address any subject. Nothing is taboo. Everything is open to criticism, satire, and mockery. I wholeheartedly agree, and would be remiss not to mention that this is also a rule. I suggest we stop pretending there are no rules and dedicate ourselves to learning them. Not a list of do’s and don’ts — that list would be enormously long and not particularly useful. I mean the essentials: the things you must possess to create comedy at all. Lacking any one of them makes comedy impossible. There are five: point of view, courage, humility, truth, and faith. Point of view is your perspective on a topic. Everybody has one, but comedy requires you to understand yours. That requires self-examination, which is often painful and humiliating. It’s easier to just take someone else’s point of view than to put forth the effort to contemplate your own. Courage is what it takes to express your point of view publicly. Lots of people will signal their disagreement by explaining how much you remind them of Hitler. They will hold you personally responsible for all the evil in whittling, raisin muffins, and disc golf. Without courage, the fear of being unpopular will shut down your sense of humor. Humility is the nagging suspicion that you might be wrong about everything. Comedy projects confidence, certainty, infallibility on even the most mundane subjects. Humility is what keeps you from believing your own bravado. Truth is the target. Comedy always tells the truth. Telling the truth requires first believing there is such a thing. When you don’t believe in objective truth, you’re trying to hit a target that you doubt exists. Which brings us to faith. Of all the essentials this is the essentialest.3 You cannot reason your way to funny. Laughter, like sunrise, is an irrational phenomenon that can’t be guaranteed. We believe a joke will work today simply because it brought the house down yesterday. We believe the sun will rise tomorrow because it rose today, not because sunrise ‘makes perfect sense.’ The basis for both beliefs is faith. I’ll write at length about each of these essentials in separate posts, which means you should hold your objections until then. I don’t want you to have to issue a sheepish apology after you realize I’m right. Of course, you’re free to ignore these essentials entirely. You can skip point of view, forgo courage, dispense with humility, reject truth, and abandon faith. You’ll still produce something. It just won’t be funny. It’s the humor of people who believe comedy has no rules. johnbranyan1.substack.com/p/5-essentials…

The Comedy Round Table open.substack.com/pub/johnbranya…

Somebody named Jess Piper, claiming to be on a mission to make sure billionaires don’t destroy public school, is bigly mad at something called ‘The “Herzog Foundation” which I assume to be either a diabolical gathering of criminal masterminds or a giant mechanical rodent that topples skyscrapers or a combination of both. While I’m opposed to criminal hijinks and ransacking robot rodents, I’m totally on board with the hand painted sign that reads, “Our School Is Not Your Church!” It’s way past time to put the religious zealots on notice that they don’t get to preach their sermons to our kids... johnbranyan1.substack.com/p/our-schools-…

@PerfInjust To which institutions are you referring?

Evangelicals struggle to enter institutions because they think 1. That speaking at institutions from the outside is effective (it's not). 2. That reforming everyday life ("focus on the family" or "preach the gospel") will organically cause political/social change (it doesn't). Political and social change mainly happens via elites in institutions.

When I mention Jiddu Krishnamurti you’ll be stricken with fear about how to pronounce his name. That’s ironic because he gave a lecture in 1984 that revealed how you can eliminate fear from your life. So I should have waited to mention his name until after you were given the secret to overcoming the terror of pronouncing it, but it’s too late now. You should stick around though because the secret to eliminating fear from your life is super easy (according to the guy whose name I don’t have the energy to type again). “Stop being afraid of things.” johnbranyan1.substack.com/p/just-stop-be…

@mister_shroom_2 @JoelWBerry We can simulate Harry Potter riding a broom too.

@JoelWBerry I'm not denying that there could be a divine power (not neccessarily the one from the Bible) using intelligent design, but all of this can be explained by evolution. We can very clearly simulate the process from abiogensis to increasingly complex forms of life over a long time.

It’s an automated factory. It’s a supercomputer. We can’t make one, with all our knowledge and technology. People pretending to be serious scientists say this was created by lightning striking a mud puddle. That’s what they still teach in school.

"I saw a video clip of a human cell and got a clue that I don’t really have a clue about what’s actually going on in the world ... Sometimes I put waaaaay too much faith in my ability to grasp reality. I say things like, “I won’t believe it until I see it for myself,” smugly trusting my eyes will give me everything I need for understanding. Then I watch a video of a human cell operating and I can’t make any sense of what I see. It’s almost unbelievable..." johnbranyan1.substack.com/p/i-dont-see-m…

It seems plausible that ignorant students are the result of terrible teachers. Recently, a prominent political figure in my home State was invited to speak at a high school. The politician is an outspoken Christian which is problematic for terrible people including those who happen to be teachers. Several teachers stepped up to educate me about their terribleness. “Religion, as our Founding Fathers believed, should be kept separate from matters of state,” wrote a public school teacher whom we’ll call ‘Kels.’ “The doctrine espoused by Jefferson also means that the government should not interfere with religion. It works both ways. Would you want a representative from the government to come into your church and regulate all that you do?” Kels (who, remember, is a teacher) lectured that the government should not interfere with religion AND that representatives from the government cannot regulate what happens in church. Both of those concepts are true while also being the exact same concept. In between her restatements of the same idea she says, “It works both ways.” Which is not only wrong, but also incorrect. Aside from that, she is mistaken. The separation of church and State goes in one direction. The government cannot force you to go to church, pray to Ra, worship cows, or celebrate Kwanza. At the same time, the government cannot stop you from doing those things or any other kooky ritual your religion requires. Kels understood that as a teacher, she can’t force her students to cross themselves but doesn’t understand that as United States citizen, she is allowed to cross herself, pray facing Mecca, or wear a medicine bag around her neck without violating the separation of church and State. That’s only half the problem… Another person, who we’ll call ‘Sands,’ made this astonishing statement: “I am a teacher at a public institution, and I am an atheist. I do not teach my students about atheism, nor do I prohibit any discussion of religion in my classes, however; there should not be any proselytizing for religion in public school.” Sands (who, remember, is a teacher) claims that she does not prohibit ANY discussion of religion…except proselytizing. That’s like allowing discussion of sports as long as you don’t mention your favorite team. You can discuss health and fitness but you can’t talk about your personal diet. Sands went on to say, “In public schools you have people of many beliefs and no beliefs. It’s disrespectful to make it seem like one set of beliefs is better than another.” Sands (reminder: a teacher) actually said there are people in public school with ‘no beliefs.’ She’s unaware that saying you have “no beliefs” is itself a belief. “John, you jerk!!! You know what she means!!! She’s saying that some people aren’t religious!!!!” I know that’s what she’s saying. I also know why she’s saying it. Atheists think that saying, “I don’t believe in God,” sets them free from the constraints of religious convictions. They believe it’s not religious to say, “It’s disrespectful to treat one belief as better than another.” They don’t see any disrespect in telling Christians to leave their beliefs at home. Atheists believe incoherence and self-contradiction are exclusive to ‘religion’ and it is therefore impossible for them to be irrational because they aren’t ‘religious.’ Understand? If you do, I dare you to try and explain it these teachers. So…A politician expressed his religious views in a public school and the religious response from public school teachers was that religion does not belong in public school. These teachers insist that they are not religious because that would be a violation of the separation of church and State. I think terrible teachers might be having a negative impact on public school education. (Romans 1:20) For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

When I wrote about the horde of Christian women showing up to defend divorce as a ‘good thing,’, I expected the rebuttals would primarily fall into two categories: 1) personal insults, 2)counter arguments to things I didn’t say I received a decent number of comments in both categories. I also heard from an individual with the title “Christian Divorce Recovery Leader” who said: “I’d say this post relies on mockery, not truth…” and I am compelled to respond to that outrageous accusation…with mockery. My post relied on mockery AND truth. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. It’s absurd to suggest that my article is untrustworthy merely because it’s delightful to read. Are they just handing out Christian Divorce Recovery Leader certifications to anybody these days? The comment continued: “It trivializes abuse, turns survivors into caricatures, and attacks a straw man: the bored, selfish wife.” It was not my intention to trivialize abuse. I was trying to discredit your use of the word entirely. Referring to every divorced person as a ‘survivor’ is truly a caricature. You’re not storming Normandy. You’re blocking a guy on Facebook while taking half his assets. Divorce is not like living through a plane crash, or the Holocaust, or a 5-minute lecture from a Christian Divorce Recovery Leader. Christians throw the word ‘abuse’ around so much that I assumed Jesus must have listed it as grounds for breaking marriage vows. But he didn’t! I wonder why… (Here’s where you accuse me of lacking compassion for battered women and being literally the problem. Me, specifically. I am the reason your marriage collapsed. I am the source of all your suffering.) There’s zero chance that Jesus supports actual abuse. There’s a 100% chance that Jesus knew the term ‘abuse’ would be inserted into Christian theology with no specific definition. He knew that sinful people would claim to be abused in order to justify kicking their spouse (and kids) to the curb. The person trivializing abuse is the one giving the same divorce advice to battered women and bored housewives. And accusing me of supporting domestic violence also trivializes suffering, along with being a lie. The comment wraps up by saying: “…Nearly 6 in 10 divorces are for just 3 serious betrayals: abuse, sexual infidelity, and substance abuse.” If I presented data from husbands whose wives divorced them for reasons other than abuse, addiction, adultery, or abandonment—you might say that data was not relevant. You might say that those statistics have no bearing on the circumstances in each individual divorce. You might say that anecdotal evidence doesn’t change what God expects from us. And you would be correct. The Christian Divorce Recovery Leader’s website (which I am not linking to because that would make it easier to visit) says, “I am pro-marriage. I believe in the sanctity of marriage: God meant marriage to be loving, undefiled, and lifelong.” It’s similar to reading, “I am pro-meatloaf,” on a vegan website. You don’t get credit for believing in something you actively manage the exit strategy for. You’re like a lifeguard who believes in swimming then spends all day pulling people out of the pool. At some point, your actions reveal your beliefs. And, for what it’s worth, I’m still not convinced that divorce is ever a ‘good thing.’ (James 2:18) But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.

I don’t know what the Lt. Governor of Indiana said when he spoke at Valparaiso High School. It doesn’t matter. Public schools are not places where language is processed. The outrage that erupted from his visit has nothing to do with the things he said. The Superintendent of Valpo schools apologized for not informing parents about the Lt. Governor’s visit so the parents could yank their children out of the auditorium to protect them from hearing new ideas. Who taught these parents to do this? Where did they learn that it’s good to avoid learning? They learned it from teachers who say things like, “I taught for 42 years from kindergarten through college. Never uttered a word about religion or politics. I taught kindness and respect at all levels.” (That’s an actual quote from an actual person who actually claims to be a teacher.) For over 40 years, this individual talked about kindness and respect but didn’t ‘utter a word about religion.’ This teacher sincerely believes that values, ethics, and morality exist apart from religion. It’s like teaching numbers without uttering a word about math. This belief is sustained by restricting the definition of religion to ‘church stuff.’ The secularists insist that they have no religion because they don’t meet every Sunday to perform rituals. The worst kind of zealots are ignorant of their zealotry. This same teacher said, “[Kindness and respect] are values that can be held by people of faith or people who have no faith.” The teacher thinks the phrase, “I’m not religious,” magically erases all religious beliefs and that faith doesn’t exist unless it’s acknowledged. If I don’t claim to have faith, then I have no faith. Likewise, if I close my eyes the world disappears. These are the people teaching students how to respond to a speech from the Lt. Governor. Over the last four decades, they’ve produced an enormous population of nitwits. “John, you jerk! There are good teachers in public school! They care about kids!!” Like I said, public school is not a place where language is processed. It may not be your fault that you don’t understand what this article is about. You are possibly the product of poor education. I can’t help you. Thinking is a gift from God. You can ask Him for wisdom and he will give you some. Or you can just enjoy the rage you’re feeling. That’s easier. (James 1:5) If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.

Russell Moore said, “While divorce is sometimes necessary, it is never good,” and that was the cue for a horde of divorced Christian women to defend the dissolution of families. Because a lot of people heard that and went, “Never good? Excuse me, have you met my husband? Divorce was the most spirit-led thing I’ve done since deciding to homeschool.” Nobody gets divorced because they got bored, selfish, resentful, or fell in love with a personal trainer named Chase. Everybody has a testimony. Every divorce comes with a trailer voice. “In a world… where he forgot date night… one woman found the courage… to file.” If you can successfully ignore scripture for long enough, you’ll come to believe God’s highest priority for a married woman is that she be happy at all times. Not holy. Not faithful. Not patient. Happy. Constantly. The Proverbs 31 woman’s operating principle is, “my needs are not being met.” Modern Christians have a slightly lower threshold for suffering than our ancestors. The martyrs got fed to lions. Ashley had to share a bed with a man who chews ice and can’t properly load a dishwasher. That’s why every story has to escalate into abuse language, because if you just say, “I didn’t like being gracious,” that sounds selfish. But if you say, “The divorce began long before the paperwork,” it sounds like something completely outside your control. “Divorce happens long before the filing of any papers.” That’s like saying, “Home ownership happens long before the title transfer.” No it doesn’t. Until then, you’re just walking around open houses with a vision board and an iced coffee. Divorce happens when you sign the papers, not when you run out of patience. They want all the moral drama of heroism with none of the moral burden of vows. They don’t want to say, “I broke a promise.” They want to say, “I survived a journey.” Ma’am, a journey is hiking the Appalachian Trail. Divorce is deleting your wedding photos and changing your bio to “healing.” Say it in church words, it stops sounding like self-centeredness and starts sounding like obedience. You didn’t leave your husband, you “followed peace.” You didn’t break vows, you “honored your future self.” When it’s over, it’s no more dramatic than returning a blender. “It just wasn’t the right fit for this season of my life.” It’s good to be rid of bad blenders. God doesn’t want us to endure lumps in our smoothies. (Matthew 19:4) “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”

@KR3Wmatic Tell her atheism is irrational. It's the religion of simpletons.

My atheist daughter asked me to prove God's existence. What do I tell her? She is 19.

@BRijswijk @Lumberjackish_ @paulogia0 Good! You already believe!

@john_branyan @Lumberjackish_ @paulogia0 Go tell that to Jesus…

If the Romans disposed of Jesus' body, the location was unknown. If his family buried him, it would not be in Jerusalem. If the Sanhedrin, he would be unmarked in a criminal's graveyard. Joseph of Arimathea was a literary device created to fill an awkward plot hole. #goodfriday

@BRijswijk @Lumberjackish_ @paulogia0 I don't care whether you believe me or not.

@john_branyan @Lumberjackish_ @paulogia0 It is if you want me to believe you.

@BRijswijk @Lumberjackish_ @paulogia0 It's not up to me to prove anything there buddy.

@john_branyan @Lumberjackish_ @paulogia0 Ehm? You’re shifting the burden of proof there buddy. It’s up to you to show it happened…

Jesus told us who he was and didn't mention his ethnicity. Fortunately, there are some noisy church attendees who aren't afraid to use racism to speak with boldness about things the Bible doesn’t tell us. On easter, a guy in a robe who stands behind a pulpit said, "Jesus was a brown-skinned man from northeast Africa. Not European. Not American. Not whitewashed to fit your preference." In case you're not good with geography, this quote helpfully explains that Africa is not Europe or America. The color of Jesus skin doesn’t seem to be of major importance to any New Testament author. When Jesus talked about where he was from, he didn’t say Africa. He said, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world" (John 8:23). In case you're not good with geography, "not of this world" is not Europe, America, or Africa. Easter is an opportunity to celebrate the one earthly place that Jesus came from that truly mattered — the grave. Jesus came back from the land of the dead. None of the eyewitnesses noted his skin color and said, "Lo, his skin was a shade of brown, not like that of a European or an American since America did not exist.” What the eyewitnesses noted was that he was alive. That detail distracted them so much that nobody followed up with questions about his complexion. Kudos to you guys in robes for finally bringing Jesus’ pigmentation into the conversation. The word of God omitted it entirely so it’s not prioritized in many church congregations. If unbiblical doctrine is ever going to get preached, we need people (preferably in robes) to stand behind pulpits and proclaim it. Simply reading the scripture won’t make anyone a racist. The church needs to hear messages of bigotry from people who claim authority or it will never become the model of racism that the world needs. For centuries the church has stubbornly insisted on organizing ourselves around a resurrected savior rather than a demographic. The world has been dividing people by appearance for a long time without our help. Teachers like @TalbertSwan are helping the church start pulling its weight. (Colossians 3:11) Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.

@HansFiene You're not a billionaire already??

@john_branyan I would be a good and virtuous billionaire!

People who have no understanding of history and human nature should not be in charge of things