Tag: christianity

Changing My Religion

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

Sacrifice for the benefit of others must be willing. If it is not willing, then it is not sacrifice, but coerced. Ask yourself, did the goats and bulls slaughtered in the ancient Hebrew religion volunteer themselves or were their throats cut and their blood shed without their permission?

“ Doubt is the origin of wisdom.” — Rene Descartes, ‘Meditations on First Philosophy’

In the movie, The Three Musketeers, the lovely, voluptuous, and decidedly evil character of Milady De Winter, played by Rebecca de Mornay, made a comment which, I believe, is far deeper in meaning than what seems to be the driving force of the moment. At a time when Cardinal Richelieu (Tim Curry) tried to proposition her with the threat that he could destroy her with a snap of his fingers, she countered by sticking the point of a dagger into his gut and replied,

“With a flick of my wrist, I can change your religion.”

In other words, according to this, one’s religion is based on circumstances, which, in our current economic, political, and philosophical climate may not be far from the truth. But, that’s another story.

I am not a dogmatic, stubborn, emotional believer in anything. I question everything and reject what doesn’t hold up as logical and reasonable. I have no problem at all with discarding something I once thought true if, after consideration, I found it to be rationally inconsistent with the basic premise of the argument. Religion is, after all, nothing more than a belief in a specific theological philosophy which seeks to explain the meaning of life, death, good, and evil, and raises one or more entities and law systems to the position of sovereign, over and above all others. All religions, including Christianity, are cut from this cloth and deserve, in my opinion, to be scrutinized closely to find the flaws and inconsistencies of the narrative which is supposedly “The Truth”.

End of argument. Except that it’s not.

A few months ago, I posted an article in which I said that I was having serious trouble with recognizing that a violent, bloody sacrifice was necessary to mollify God and to provide sufficient “payment” for my sins so that the Gates of Heaven could be opened to me forever and ever. I find it disturbing that one of the most brutal, murderous, and blood-thirsty “gods” of history, Yahweh, is still worshipped in a cleaner, more sanitized version of religion by the hundreds of millions of Christians who inherited their religion from the Hebrew Jewish tradition. In addition, not only do Christians, by and large, fervently support the notion of blood sacrifice as payment for sins, but many of them also fervently support the actions of the brutal, murderous and blood-thirsty State of Israel which claims that it, and it alone, has the God-given promise of being the “chosen people”, which means they think they can get away with anything and their Christian sycophants allow them to.

I was brought into this world against astronomical odds. It is staggering that I (or you) were even conceived. One specific sexual union between my father and mother, at one specific time, with 300 million sperm cells all competing to enter into one specific ovum, and only the one which actually “won” created the specific individual that I am. If this had varied by an infinitesimal amount, if another sperm had penetrated the egg cell wall before my own did, then I would not be here, but my brother or sister would. If my parents had not engaged in sex on that particular day, none of this would have happened.

To put it bluntly, life itself is a chance encounter. Should I be found guilty before God because I was conceived in a manner over which I had no control and which can be attributed entirely to chance, simply because Jewish and Christian tradition and teaching promote the idea that all of the sinfulness of humanity is derived from a decision by the first two people, Adam and Eve, who made the wrong decision, thereby condemning the rest of their descendants to a lifetime of misery and an eternity of torture? All because they made a poor choice?

That is a peripheral argument and does not play into my present dilemma, so I will say nothing more about it. What I am really struggling with is the idea that I must have, MUST HAVE, some entity, animal or human, killed in a bloody, violent manner to atone for my own personal failings and flaws, so that God will be satisfied with the “payment” and my relationship with God can be restored. This is what MUST HAPPEN according to the accepted and cherished beliefs of most of those who call themselves Christian.

I am going to go out on a limb and saw it off!

I have come to the understanding that this is bullshit. It is nothing more than an extension of an ancient religion which taught that God, whatever or whoever God was or is, can be placated and bought off by the destruction of a part of His creation and, as a consequence, will extend mercy and forgiveness to those who are attempting to purchase a “Get out of jail free” card. Since I have gone this far and see no good reason to recant and confess my unbelief, I might as well go all the way. Christianity, at least the way it has been taught for millennia, has always been based on fear. People live in panic-driven fear that they will “go to Hell” if they do not accept the premise of the faith, being that God, Yahweh, basks in the “sweet savor and aroma” of spilled blood to show humanity that they are incapable of attaining righteousness on their own.

Well, that last part, at least, is true. I cannot become righteous in my own efforts, even by religiously obeying the commandments laid down to the extreme jot and tittle. There is no doubt in my mind that I am imperfect, flawed, mistake-prone, and, yes, sinful, to use the term as a descriptor of the distance between myself and the perfection of God. But this is where the Spirit of God comes into play–teaching, showing, persuading, influencing my daily thoughts, decisions, words, and actions to bring me closer and closer to the ultimate ideal of godliness, holiness, and righteousness. What I have to do is admit my own failings, confess my own need for assistance and guidance, and accept that God, Who loves me, will enable me to emulate and experience His nature while I am on this planet.

“He has shown you, O man, what is good: And what does the Lord require of you, but to do justice, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.” (Micah 6:8)

You can’t beat something with nothing.

Certainly, the Christian belief in the atoning death of Jesus is something and I do not discount that at all. Not the least bit. The issue here stems from the belief that it was necessary to restore man’s relationship with God, Who demanded that something or someone die to compensate for man’s sins, and that this death be violent and bloody. I do not accept that any more, therefore, it is incumbent on me to produce something better and it is my intention to do so. I do not expect to cover this in one singular posting and I still do not have a firm grasp on the concept myself. It is a work in progress, compared, Biblically speaking, to the beginning of labor pains and the “child” which is birthed from it may be beautiful or it may be a monster akin to the Hunchback of Notre Dame. I simply do not know, but I have to push, push, push, anyway, no matter the pain of the moment.

Golden Rule. Platinum Rule. Ho-hum!

Roger Mitchell1 Comment

Recently, I was involved in a “debate” on the Unz Review concerning the Golden Rule and its (supposedly better, certainly more modern) re-interpretation, the Platinum Rule. This was sparked by a comment I made at an article by one, Caitlin Johnstone, a popular blogger, who is not afraid to blast what she sees as unjust, immoral, and wrong. I salute her for the well-meaning intent, but take issue with some of her stances. Our philosophical differences have no bearing on the current subject. If you read this article and scroll down through the links, you will find my initial comment as #5, from which you can read replies by other commenters and my own replies to them.

https://www.unz.com/cjohnstone/im-not-political-just-means-i-support-the-status-quo

During the course of this “conversation”, someone brought up the idea that the Platinum Rule was superior to the Golden Rule with respect to the relationship between people. I had to admit that I had never heard of the Platinum Rule before and, more than likely, you may not have either. There is an enormous amount of information on the Internet about it. Just type the key words, platinum rule, into your browser. However, for those who can’t be bothered, the tension between the Golden Rule and the Platinum Rule reads like this:

  • Golden Rule: “Treat others as you want them to treat you.”
  • Platinum Rule: “Treat others as they want to be treated.”

Apparently, the main sticking point in the Golden Rule for some people is that they read it as selfish and self-centered. It is a manipulative system in which you give others what you desire for yourself and you expect to receive it as compensation for your “giving”. Honestly speaking, this is no different than the attitude and belief that many Christians have when they drop cash in the “offering” plate at their weekly gathering on Sunday morning. I don’t see it that way and I am quite certain that Jesus didn’t mean it as such. See more on that below.

On the other hand, treating others as they want to be treated can lead to disaster. Ask yourself, how would someone like Benjamin Netanyahu want to be treated, and the problem becomes immediately clear. How does Donald Trump want to be treated? How does an abusive, philandering husband or a perpetually victimized wife want to be treated? Giving someone everything that they wish for is a recipe for disaster and must be avoided religiously, at all costs, because there are times when people like that need a good, swift kick in the ass and a reprimand, which is most definitely NOT what they want.

The main problem I find with the Platinum Rule is that it is nothing more than a cleaned up, sanitized, and more professional version of the Golden Rule. The Platinum Rule appeals to “educated” people–psychologists, group leaders, human resource administrators, politicians, etc., and others who specialize in molding and directing people into their own mode of thinking. In reality, it is a clinical take on what Jesus taught 2000 years ago, but is no different in essence, as long as it is not self-seeking.

Eventually, after some give and take in the discussion, I posted this response which has not been answered nor challenged. In fact, there is no good rebuttal to the main thrust of my argument. Sometimes, silence speaks louder than words.

“After some reading on this subject, I have decided that there really is no substantial difference between the Golden Rule and the Platinum Rule. They are flip sides of the same coin. The wording is different but the principle behind them is the same. The whole argument is one of semantics and arguing over which one is better only muddies the water.”

“Whether one treats others from the perspective of the Golden Rule or approaches from the Platinum Rule, the core issue remains and can be phrased by this question. At the most basic level, what is the one desire which everyone has? Answer: to be loved. Ultimately, we are all crying out for the same thing, that someone love us for who we are in spite of our very obvious failings. This need is the same in Donald Trump as it is in the lowest homeless beggar in the worst slum of the largest city on Earth and everyone manifests that need in different ways, even though they are asking for the same thing–“Love me.” It is our responsibility to find a way to do just that for others while also understanding that we are looking for the same thing within ourselves. It is the practice of loving others that teaches us our own need and we satisfy our need, paradoxically, by self-sacrificial giving so that the need in others is also satisfied.”

“Incidentally, just because someone wants something does not mean that we are obligated to give it to them. Fulfilling their wants may not be beneficial to them, but may very well increase their demands. “Give me more!” Sometimes, the best thing we could do for others like this is to give them a good, swift kick in the pants and the directive to grow up.”

“This is not a matter of bowling balls and cheeseburgers. In fact, the entire concept transcends the physical world (which is nothing more than a collection of “things”). It rises above the emotional state which reflects the broken aspects of ourselves. It IS a matter of spirit, the spirit of love, and when that is correct and proper, all other parts of our psyche and makeup are healed.”

“How do I want to be treated? With love. How do you want to be treated? With love. How should we treat others and how should they treat us? With love. Both the Golden Rule and the Platinum Rule are methods of teaching that principle to people who learn by doing, making mistakes along the way, but correcting them when they are recognized.”

“God is love. We are created in the image of God. We are also human, therefore flawed and imperfect, yet we can become like God, through the deliberate and conscious choice to surrender the desires we selfishly hold in the interests of showing love to others, so that they too can become like God.”

“This is as simple an explanation as I can make and, while I fall short at times, the end goal of perfection, perfect love, is always within my sight.”

If I truly love someone, I will do what is best for them regardless what it costs me, regardless of what I might gain from them, regardless of what they want me to do for them.

The End of a Bloody Religion: Burn Me at the Stake!

Roger Mitchell4 Comments

Previous civilizations often understood history as cyclical, unstable, and prone to sudden reversal. Empires rose and fell. Religious systems fragmented. Political orders disintegrated. Periods of stability often concealed exhaustion beneath the surface. Historical permanence was generally viewed with caution rather than with certainty. — https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/the-speed-of-historical-reversals

Religious systems fragmented. If mankind is able to make it through another two thousand years without destroying himself and his world, what will history say about Christianity? Will Christianity even exist in the form we know it today? I find that doubtful.

What I am writing here is controversial and many will immediately, emotionally, and instinctively recoil because I am seriously questioning the religious system which I was born into and have always been a part of. Well, that was then, this is now, and I cannot close my eyes to what is unfolding in front of me just because my parents taught any one certain doctrine or because it goes against the grain of accepted belief. 

"With what shall I come before the Lord,
And bow myself before the High God?
Shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, 
With calves a year old?
Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams,
Ten thousand rivers of oil? 
Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression,
The fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?"

"He has shown you, O man, what is good;
And what does the Lord require of you
But to do justly, 
To love mercy, 
And to walk humbly with your God?"

Micah 6:6-8

Tension. Decision time. One way or another. Either we try to buy our way out of jail or we simply follow the example set before us.

“However, truth will out in the long run,…” — from the next-to-last paragraph in Douglas Reed’s book, The Controversy of Zion, Chapter two.

I got through about three-quarters of Reed’s book, then put it down for some reason without finishing it, but am going to pick it up again and complete it. However, since I have forgotten most of what was previously read, I will have to start at the beginning, taking better notes this time. No doubt the second reading will reinforce the “heretical” thoughts which are roiling around in my mind, beginning with this one.

If, as Reed contends, the Judaic religion stems from the Levitical priesthood and the practice of blood sacrifice as compensation for sins and, since Christianity is based on that religion, doesn’t this make the belief that Jesus Christ, as the ultimate blood sacrifice, little more than an extension of the ancient Hebrew religion? Does this fact make it suspect and are we allowed to argue whether it is true or not? It is, after all, a belief which cannot be proven nor disproven.1 If God “desires mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings…”, then wouldn’t this negate the idea that sinful man still needs to go through a more-sanitized, more-spiritualized, more modern and genteel ritual in order to be “saved”? Why do I need to bow down to a bloody, religiously-formed doctrine as “payment” for my sins to a God Who also proclaimed through the Scriptures,

“Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.” — 1 John 4:7-82

It’s pretty hard to get past that statement that everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Well, isn’t it?

I admit to my God, to myself, and to one and all that I am flawed. I am not perfect. I have my failings. Yet, I recognize that my imperfections can be worked out and overcome IF I rely on the power of the Holy Spirit to enable me AND I follow the path shown by Jesus the Christ who surrendered His own will to that of the Father. Is it an absolute necessity that my sins be washed away in a torrent of warm, oxygen-rich blood for me to gain a ticket to heaven? Hasn’t this Levitical/Judahite/Pharisaical religion of law been superseded by a better way? Can I move beyond that and acknowledge that the true way to total communion with God, Who is love, is to love my neighbor as I love myself? Love my neighbor and my enemy at least as much as I love myself. (Galatians 5:14)

Heretical? You bet. There are many, some close to me, who would tell me emphatically that, if I do not abandon these thoughts and hew to the “party” line, then I am on my way to Hell without any chance of forgiveness. However, in that, all they can do is parrot the idea that a blood sacrifice MUST be presented on my behalf and that I MUST accept it as truth.

Who is right? As Reed mentioned, the truth will out in the long run. All I can do is pursue it wherever it leads. Or, to paraphrase Ecclesiastes 12:12, on the asking of questions, there is no end. Since we do not have all the answers, but are encouraged to know God, Who is omniscient and does have the answers, I sincerely doubt that God will destroy me for asking questions. Instead, I expect that He will be more than willing to help me overcome my ignorance.

“You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free.” — Jesus Christ, quoted in John 8:32

I began thinking about this some six or eight months ago. In my whole lifetime, even in my early years, I have never been comfortable with the religious doctrine that God requires the blood of an innocent (whether person or animal) be spilled as a vicarious payment for the condition I was born into without a choice. After 67 years of searching and learning, I am just about ready to drop it entirely. However, I am still working this over, trying to make sense of it reasonably. Where will it take me? I do not know and, in this, I am taking the tack that God will lead me to the truth on the path ahead, in spite of the murkiness and darkness. My faith in His goodness is not at question nor wavering, but is actually stronger than ever, and I have no doubt that He will guide me through to the end because His main attribute, from which everything else originates, is love. Pure, uncompromising love which I am slowly coming to grips with and it is that understanding which is setting me free. And, unlike the devil, I am learning gratitude, real and honest gratitude, that I have been kept relatively safe for long enough to learn what that love means.

“My best feelings, gratitude, for example, are formally forbidden solely because of my social position.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

Am I to be condemned? Well, according to some people who may have never had an original thought in their life, absolutely! However, I am quite glad that my future and eternity rests, not on a religious acceptance of what MIGHT be a flawed doctrine, but entirely on the judgment and mercy of the real Supreme Court, to which I will eventually be haled in front of and ordered to present my case.

I am at peace.

  1. In this respect, all religions, including Christianity, are like science which is never completely settled, but is always questioning and pushing beyond the traditionally accepted boundaries. We saw this in the Era of Covid where the “science of true belief” was propagated and extolled over the reality of truth. In discussing the issue with one of my erstwhile friends who constantly pitched the “fact” that 97% of all scientists were in agreement, I made the comment that, “Correlation does not equal causation. Neither does consensus.” Just because everyone believes something does not make it true. See Galileo and the theory that the sun revolves around the earth, for example. Athanasius contra mundum, for another. And this–https://poorrogersalmanac.com/2021/06/21/the-science-of-true-belief/ ↩︎
  2. This brings up the question that has never been adequately answered, in my opinion. What about all those people who have been born and died, and are destined to Hell because they never heard about the sacrifice that Jesus made for them and have never been given the opportunity to accept it as payment for their sins? More on this later. ↩︎

“Vengeance is Mine, I Will Make You Pay”, says Donald Trump

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

“An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. That way the whole world will be blind and toothless.” — Tevye, from Fiddler on the Roof

“Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” — Romans 12:17-19 NKJV

Contrast those sentiments with the words coming out of the mouth of the one who thinks he can do anything because he is the president of the United States.

“They’ve [Venezuela] treated us badly. I guess now we’re not treating them so good.” — Donald Trump

https://twitter.com/i/status/1999565449093169515, at about 51 seconds in.

During the entire history of Christianity from the very beginning 2000 years ago, one of the points of the message has been that retaliatory vengeance, the repaying of evil with evil, is not to be tolerated. Instead, God claims vengeful authority for Himself alone, and any instance where Man is allowed to exercise power in that area of the realm is by designated permission which is constrained by clearly marked parameters and boundaries. In fact, the legal basis for restraining one from taking vengeance goes all the way back to the early days of the Hebrew nation, e.g., among others,

  • Deuteronomy 32:35 “Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and their doom comes swiftly.”
  • Leviticus 19:18 “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.”

The amount of ink spilled onto paper concerning the so-called Christian roots of America is voluminous and even today there are those who call America a Christian nation (or at the very least, call for America to return to its Christian beginning). Yet, in all of this, where are the voices of prominent Christians who tell Donald Trump to change his course, to cool down his rhetoric, to take it easy where it concerns his belligerent words and actions?

Chuck Baldwin comes readily to mind, but there are not a lot of others that I know of.

I am not surprised by Trump. He is promoting his own religion, one of unilateral power, wealth-gathering, and self-importance which incorporates many aspects of religious worship but cannot rightly be called Christian. The ones I am constantly in amazement of are those who call themselves disciples of Jesus Christ, but who flock to Trump’s banner and idolize him as the modern, visible incarnation of the anointed messiah, despite the clear commands of Scripture. In many circles within American society today, criticizing the man about anything he might have said or done is swiftly met with vituperative condemnation.

The questions before us are the same as those posed by the prophet Elijah to the people of Israel at Mount Carmel in his head-to-head confrontation with the prophets of Baal. Who is the god you will worship? Whose word is true? What are you going to believe? These, and others like them, have to be answered in the hearts and minds of all of us and it would be best to settle them, once and for all, before fire rains down from heaven…again. This time, it could be nuclear.

Oppression Shall Cease: O Holy Night

Roger Mitchell5 Comments

December 25, 2024. Christmas Day.

“Truly He taught us to love one another, His law is love and His gospel is peace. Chains shall He break for the slave is our brother and in His Name, all oppression shall cease…” — from the Christmas hymn, “O, Holy Night”

ALL oppression shall cease. It follows logically that, wherever oppression exists, His Name has not yet become the guide for life. Wherever people are oppressed, the Name of Christ has not become the Law which is followed and obeyed in everyday life. This applies to both the individual and the collective (corporate, according to Karl Ludwig von Haller), because it is certain that both the individual and the collective can be (and are) oppressive.

All OPPRESSION shall cease. Oppression implies control because it is impossible to oppress someone, anyone, unless control is established over them. It follows that the less control we have over others, the less possibility there is to oppress them. If the statement that all oppression shall cease is true, then it must mean that all control over others must also come to an end. Of course, there are qualifiers: parents exercise control over their children, but only to the point where their children are able to function as responsible individuals in their own right. Once that point is reached, control must be relinquished and the child must become liable for his own actions.

All oppression SHALL cease. This implies that the cessation of oppression in all aspects of life is future-oriented and will not occur completely nor immediately in the present. This should give us hope that the future will be better than the present or the past. There are issues we have to work through to gain the end of oppression–both individually and collectively. Christians, especially, ought to understand this since we are taught that holiness is gained progressively as we surrender and submit our lives to the Kingship and Authority of Jesus, the Christ. If the Law of Christ is not oppressive and brings peace, then, as His disciples, we gradually and progressively learn to become non-oppressive towards ourselves and others as well. We learn, over time and through experience, to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, minimizing and eventually eliminating the effect of oppression on them and that expression is a personal choice made by us, as individuals, under and with the power and authority of the Holy Spirit working in and through us. We have no excuses for not going down down this road.

All oppression shall CEASE. Come to an end. Be eliminated. Can this really happen in time and on Earth? Do we, as sinful persons, need to have a Messiah descend from Heaven to impose this upon us OR do we have the capability to make this fulfilled now? Again, Christians ought to know the answer to this question. Yes, we do, and it is by the grace and power of the Holy Spirit that we are able to achieve this goal. We can refuse to oppress others. We can love them as we love ourselves. We can serve them without expecting anything back from them. All cessation of oppression begins with the individual and expand outward into the collective (corporate), bringing to life the lesson taught by Jesus in the parable of the yeast mixed into the bread dough.

Ultimately, this is an expression of faith. The Kingdom of Jesus, the Christ, is triumphant over oppression now and will be triumphant over oppression in the future, up to the point where oppression is no longer existent. It is a long-term goal, something to be anticipated, something to work for. It is not to be given automatically. It is not a “participation trophy”. It will not be reached by imposition, only by surrender to the Word, which speaks the Gospel of Peace into our lives on a daily basis. It will not be attained by a submission to law or obedience to legislation, regardless of the source. It can only be gained by recognizing, in the present, that I am a sinner, prone to oppressing others for my own sake, and abandoning and overcoming that tendency within myself, so that all may benefit.

The obliteration of oppression does not begin with political action. It is not derived from the top down, rather, it begins at the very bottom of the pile–the soul of the individual, who recognizes that his life does not reconcile with the Law of Love and the Gospel of Peace, and begins to change his ways so as to become compliant with them. Society is a collection (collective, corporation) of individuals, and if the individual changes his ways, the society will change–for better or for worse.

The Practice of Politics: Round Three

Roger Mitchell6 Comments

In just a few days, the citizens (citoyens, comrades) of the United States will decide (rubberstamp) a Dear Leader for the next four years, which selection will have enormous implications for, not only the country itself, but the world at large. Whoever is “elected” will shape American policy, both domestic and foreign, for years to come and will largely determine what happens within the next decade.

The choice is yours. Choose well. Or refuse to participate in the process at all.

Should Christians be involved in politics? This is the burning question which I have tried to answer recently in two blog posts, see here and here. Even though my answer has been a resounding “No!”, I think that I have explained my position badly and fallen short of the real reason why I believe as I do. This is an attempt to clear the air a little, although, it is certain that this will not be sufficient for the task. It is an ongoing “enlightenment” and it will continue until I pass through the gate to an eternal home where I can see clearly through the fog that I experience now.

I have described politics as far more than just government-oriented. Politics, the practice of manipulating and the use of others to benefit oneself at their expense, is widespread throughout society. Unfortunately, this description does not resonate with the general public at all and is completely ignored by virtually everyone. I am, indeed, a voice crying in the wilderness.

So, let’s abandon “politics” for a little while and contemplate what it means to be Christian. Of course, first and foremost, is the belief that Man (both male and female) is flawed and sinful, which renders us unable to meet, know, and understand God on our own. This defect was resolved forever by the appearance of Jesus the Christ into history, Who showed by His life, death, and resurrection from death into life, that it is entirely possible for flawed, sinful Man to become like God, under certain, clearly spelled-out rules:

  1. You shall love the LORD, your God, with all your heart, soul, and mind, AND,
  2. You shall love your neighbor in the same manner that you love yourself.

End of argument. Except that we are not willing to accept this as truth, preferring instead to substitute ritual, emotion, and irrationality as our own version of the truth, which we practice faithfully, certain that this will procure a ticket into the very presence of God Himself.

We are pretty good at “loving” the LORD, our God, with all our heart, soul, and mind, but what does it really mean to love our neighbor as we love ourselves? This is the existential question and it must be clearly understood if we are ever to understand what it means to love God. These two demands go hand in hand, they cannot be separated. It is impossible to love God fully and completely UNLESS we love our neighbor fully and completely.

“If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?” –1 John 4:20, emphasis mine.

Well, all right, you might say, but WTF does this have to do with politics, government, and voting to influence the direction America (or any other nation) travels? After all, if Christians do not influence the government in a positive direction, the direction we deem to be true, right, and holy, then we are all “doomed” to live under a regime with which we do not agree, one in which we find ourselves in opposition against. Hell on earth, in other words, AND we MUST oppose that by voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Which, of course, does nothing to eliminate the evil, but actually exacerbates it since evil, to one extent of another, always wins.

The main problem with this is that it is easy to love government which solves all our problems with our neighbor by brute force and violence, but it is not so easy to love our neighbor through the application of self-sacrifice, good will, and service. Jesus did not say, “Love your neighbor by passing a law which he must obey, whether he wants to or not, and which you must pay for through taxation and regulation, even if you don’t like the extent to which you are taxed or regulated.” Instead, He said quite simply that we are to live with our neighbors, as if they (and their needs) were as important as our own, whether we like them or not.

Here is the dividing line, the distinction. Love for neighbors is voluntary. It comes out of the depths of our hearts. It does not care what it costs us personally. In our own personal relationship with our neighbors, we look out for their good. It does not matter what it costs, even if it costs everything we have, what we consider to be ours and which we are determined to hold onto at all costs, even if we have to pinch our noses as we enter the voting booth and pull the lever, signifying our belief in the “pot of message” which our favored candidate professes.

Love for neighbor cannot be achieved through a political process. It cannot be forced or violent. It must be voluntary. It is personally costly. It is self-sacrificial. We must die to ourselves so that our neighbor can live. This is the message of Christ and the Gospels and it is also that which we resist so strenuously that we have created a different, better way to “love” our neighbor: government, the application of law, and forceful action to back it up. As an example of this, it is quite easy to find a Christian church which steers a young, single mother to a government agency for “help” rather than taking her in and supporting her directly. After all, the government has plenty of money while we are struggling to pay the mortgage on our building, which is really owned by The Bank. Let’s be realistic about this.

Why? Is it not because we are afraid of our neighbor? Do we not fear what he might do to us? If this is the case, then it is better to do to him BEFORE he does to us, which principle is directly opposed to the teachings of Christ, Whom we profess to follow? Does this not create cognitive dissonance in our own minds, causing us to make excuses for all our behaviors, in spite of the irregularities and inconsistencies of our own philosophical and religious arguments? Do we create government, that is, legislation and the giving of “authority” to others, so that we can be secure and safe in our own environment? Do we accept government so that we do not have to be afraid? Yet, Jesus, in His capacity as God, asks us to completely trust Him and to accept no other as a safe haven in the storm. To be unafraid.

“And it makes me wonder.” — Led Zeppelin, “Stairway to Heaven”

In eternity, which I live in presently and will enter permanently within the next twenty years or so, the only question I have to answer is this: How do I love my neighbor? Do I love him from the depths of my heart, wishing, hoping, and working for his best even if that means I have to suffer loss, or do I try to control him through the office known as government, so that I can feel safe, even if that means that both he and I will suffer loss? Is my love for him real and lasting or is it just a face put on so that I can remain secure in my own world? Should I love my neighbor for his benefit or should I seek to control him so that I can benefit?

Politics!

Voting, whether you want to admit it or not, is just a mechanism of control. Nothing more. It is something which we use to indirectly affect how our neighbor will live or die if they refuse to behave the way we want them to. (If you click the link, notice the reference to Matthew 19:19) We can say that we love our neighbor, but if we advocate for a policy which degrades him, hobbles his ability to prosper, or restricts his behavior so that we can feel good about ourselves, then where is the consistency?

Where is the love, indeed?

There is only one reason for resorting to government as opposed to trusting God: we are afraid. We are fearful. We think about what MIGHT happen in the future and we take steps to make sure that doesn’t occur, because it might cause us harm. The actions we take are defensive in nature, yet God calls us to trust Him completely, which compels us to abandon any defensive measures and tactics, even those political in nature. Voting is such a defensive measure and, while it may serve as a feel-good, self-congratulatory action at the moment, it does nothing at all to solve the problem, which is spiritual in nature and which cannot be solved or corrected by pulling a lever in a voting booth.

Should Christians be Involved in Politics?

Roger Mitchell10 Comments

The question in the title arises from a meeting at a local church on the same subject. My wife asked me to go with her, so I did, and when the pastor asked for discussion on the topic, I gave them my opinion. After just a few minutes, I was told by some unknown person to, in essence, sit down and shut up. Which I did, then sat through an extended period in which the entire rest of the group explained all the reasons why Christians ought to be involved. None of them asked me for any further explanation. After an hour or so, I just got up and walked out. I will never go back.

Politics. Before answering the question, it should be important to understand what politics actually is. If you do not know what politics is, then you cannot answer the question. Most people associate politics with government, as in this definition, taken from Merriam-Webster:

a: the art or science of government

b: the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy

c: the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government

Now, I do not dispute the description, but the word “politics” is multi-faceted (as admitted by Merriam-Webster) and can have many different meanings and connotations. During my comments at the session, I mentioned the saying that, “Politics is a dirty business”, and asked them if Christians should be involved in dirty business. To my surprise, a lot of people nodded their heads affirmatively, which only shows that they simply do not know what the “dirty business of politics” is all about. But then, American Christians, at least the modern kind, have never been known for their acumen and understanding of the way the real world works.

I also brought up a line from Billy Joel’s song, Piano Man, which should be familiar–“And the waitress is practicing politics as the businessmen slowly get stoned…”, and explained that politics, outside the government angle, is nothing more than the manipulation of people for personal gain, which, if true, ought to provoke outrage on the part of Christians toward the practice. It was at this point that I was quite unceremoniously booted from the floor and the rest is history.

“Politics is the practice of getting what you want by manipulating other people and is always at their expense, to their detriment.” (My own description of politics. Click the link, scroll down until you find it.)

Unfortunately, politics, even in government is manipulation of some people by other people, all with one purpose (usually unspoken) in mind: control and power. Control and power. Virtually everyone is consumed with gaining power over others so that their behavior and actions can be controlled. Christians usually bring up the subject of “morality” and the dire need to make people behave the way they ought to, that is, in the manner that Christians think they ought to, because, you know, the country is diving headlong into the sewer of “immorality” and needs to be rescued. Or else, there will be hell to pay. Of course! There always is. Whether anyone else wants their version of morality or not is irrelevant. It must be done! We must get involved! We must vote! Vote! Vote! Vote for the lesser of two evils, even if that means the System as a whole becomes more evil, which mechanism is really a rear-guard action that does nothing to stop the onslaught of evil, but only slows it down a little. In the end, evil wins.

“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it.” — H.L. Mencken

“Voting is nothing more than choosing whose hand holds the club with which you are beaten. It does nothing to stop the beatings.” — another of my own quotes. You can quote me on that.

Should Christians be involved in politics? If politics is a “dirty business” and the manipulation of people for personal benefit, then the answer is an unqualified “No, they should not.” This comports with the message of the Gospel of Jesus to keep oneself unspoiled from the world and to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. However, as Christians, we are also enjoined to act as leavening agents to affect the world condition in which we find ourselves so that the entire structure is bettered by our actions. This seeming contradiction can be resolved in only one way–by determining where and in whom we place our trust and faith. As Christians, we are enjoined to have trust and faith in God alone, yet we continue to disregard this advice in preference to putting our trust and faith in man-made institutions, especially the modern form of government, that is, the totalitarian State, which encompasses and controls everything. As Christians, we have sold our souls for a pot of message, and it is coming back to bite us as a very bad case of acid reflux and dysentery. If we continue to gorge ourselves on this feast, it will kill us.

Belief and participation in the world system lead to death. This is a fact we must face and recognize as truth. Yet, knowing this, we still labor under the illusion that we can sway and impact “politics” in a positive way, for the better, if we join in, work with, and merge into the prevailing protocol. We think that we can “clean up” politics and The System if we just engage it and add our voice to the cacophony, yet we fail to understand that, in doing so, we soil ourselves and reinforce the message that men love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil.

At heart, we refuse to trust God. We would rather trust government. We would rather be practitioners of “the lesser of two evils” than turning away from evil entirely. We would rather beggar our neighbor through the application of law than to love our neighbor in service to him. We prefer to think we are holy because we go to church on Sunday morning and practice all the “accepted” perfunctory deeds that are expected, yet we do not know that our lives are as filthy rags in His sight. Yes, indeed, and I am the greatest of sinners, to paraphrase the apostle Paul.

What, then, shall be done? How, then, shall we live? Well, there is nothing to do except to change myself into and in conformance with His likeness, to become holy as He is holy, to accept that there is no other name except His by which I am saved. This alone brings freedom. It is the only path to life. Nothing else will work. Everything else will fail.

You can rationalize all you want. You can make all the excuses you want. You can delude yourselves until the chickens come home to roost. In the end, you are only deceiving yourself. There is only one way. Everything else will fail.

Everything else will fail.

A Potential Blessing from Hurricane Helene

Roger MitchellLeave a comment

Faith in government is a religion.

Since the birth of the nation-state, at the least, and the Enlightenment, many people have sought after and promoted the idea that government (State) is the highest form of authority and power. They have attempted to build systems to bring everyone into the system, which would become all-encompassing or to dispossess and destroy those who refused to bow before that authority. The Soviet Union (1917-1989) is the premier example of such a system.

Religion is inevitable. Everyone has a religion, even those deluded souls who claim that they don’t, because religion is nothing more than a belief system which informs and directs a lifestyle. Everyone believes in something and, at the very apex of that belief is something (someone) which is viewed as the most supreme. God, in other words. Those who believed (many still do) in the Soviet Union’s Marxist principles held it up as the highest pinnacle of achievement that man could reach. The total State was to become everything and everything was to become the State’s property.

In the United States, government has been constantly growing ever since the birth of the nation in 1787, when the Constitution was signed after a successful rebellion against the Crown of Britain. Americans, of all stripes, have continuously advocated for, worked for, voted for, and accepted a government which could become all things to all people. Today, of course, after nearly 250 years of incessant grasping for power, the US government has become a monstrosity which threatens to out-do the now-defunct Soviet Union. It has, for want of a better description, nearly achieved the status of God in the eyes of its followers, adherents, and groupies.

Circumstances, however, have a way of destroying people’s faith in government. For instance, in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, which devastated much of the southeast, especially in the rural areas of Appalachia, there have emerged reports that the federal government is actively blocking and prohibiting private endeavors from helping and assisting those hardest-hit. Many have lost everything they owned. Many more are literally without food or good water, yet FEMA, the federal agency tasked with working to restore society after a disaster occurs, has admitted that it is broke, out of money, and unable to perform its tasks and responsibilities.

Broke! With the modern ability to move a decimal point on a computer screen, push a button, and inject trillions of dollars into the economy on a whim, how can FEMA be broke? The obvious answer is that the money is available, but the powers-that-be have decided not to use it. In this situation, the real intent is not just to ignore the plight of those harmed, but to actively and deliberately destroy any and all opposing forces, however small, which would seek to take action on their own—WITHOUT the blessing of the State. This is a deliberate attempt to eliminate competition to the State and to force everyone to become totally dependent on the State.

The State gives and the State takes away. Blessed be the Name of the State!

The major problem with this is that the blatant contempt which is shown causes individual people to change the way they view government. People used to see government as “good” and necessary to the smooth functioning of society, but that attitude is rapidly changing and the response to Helene has probably given it a huge push forward. Those in Appalachia who clamored for decades for government “assistance” when they didn’t need it are now finding out that it is nowhere to be found when they are desperate.

Civil government is losing the trust of its citizens and with that loss, its authority to rule. Trust in anything must be built up over time and is based on the perception of reliability, but if it is once lost, it is almost never regained and the whole relationship changes. What was once given freely will now be withheld. Governments collapse and disappear because of the widespread loss of trust its citizens give it and it is quite possible that this one will not survive. Hurricane Helene may be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. If so, it will be seen in history. If not, it has added measurably to the load.

Who do people turn to now? When it is evident that their god has failed them, they change their religion. Many people will transfer their trust and faith in government and the State to some other authority which will be someone they are at least somewhat familiar with—Jesus Christ. This is, after all, the Bible Belt. They will take this message to heart:

“IF My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, AND turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” — 2nd Chronicles 7:14, emphasis mine.

This is a conditional promise. If, then. Time will tell what happens in the hearts and minds of men and history will record the result.