Mr. LaRose of Potsdam recently wrote a letter objecting, along Christian grounds, to the holding of tarot card readings within a church. Mr. Farnsworth took exception to this and wrote an attempted refutation of both LaRose and Christianity in general. I respond here to Farnsworth’s response. 

Farnsworth implied that LaRose was a “wallflower” who had published a “religious rant.” Merriam-Webster defines a wallflower as “a shy or reserved person.” In other words, the last type to publish a religious rant.

Wallflowers aside, Farnsworth seems incredulous that LaRose would object against something being done within the walls of a church. But that is precisely what Farnsworth has done as well! By objecting to Christianity as a religion, Farnsworth has raised his pen against what is done inside untold thousands of churches (on all seven continents) each and every Sunday! If Farnsworth reserves the right to tell all the churches of the world that they are wrong, perhaps he can spare LaRose the right to tell one church in Canton that it is wrong.

The irony of his position being dealt with, I will now consider Mr. Farnsworth’s attack against Scripture.

Farnsworth somehow simultaneously believes that the Gospels were written both too long ago and not quite long ago enough. 

He says the Gospels were written two-thousand years ago and therefore shouldn’t be taken seriously. Then he turns around and tells us that Mark was written a whole forty years after Christ’s crucifixion, which is far too long a time for it to be accurate. What on Earth are we to make of this Goldilocks-like gobbledygook? Two-thousand years ago is too old? 70 AD too modern? What would’ve been just right? Precisely when does Mr. Farnsworth require Mark to have been published for it to be credible?

Farnsworth also says that time stamped videography can provide historical certainty, as opposed to ancient documents like the Gospels. I would direct Farnsworth to emerging AI technology, which will soon allow the fabrication of time stamped footage “proving” anything imaginable. 

Belief in any recounting of past events requires a degree of trust; faith if you will. What Mr. Farnsworth chooses to put his faith in is his right. But if he wants to mock his Christian neighbor’s faith as silly, he must be prepared to defend his own faith against that same charge of silliness.

But what do I know? I’m just a twenty-four-year-old storyteller.

Silas Smith

Norwood