EARL NASH,WTFG HIGHER POWER Correspondent
>>>>> “It’s news to YOU...” <<<<<
While one of our rights in this Republic is
"freedom OF religion," we also are entitled to "freedom FROM
religion."
The three simple rights
that cannot be taken away are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness." Nowhere in the Bill of
Rights or the Constitution does it say that we are required to believe in, or
accept the validity, of any religion.
Charging a person with "endorsing irreligion" is to assert
that they can neither disagree with the concept of religions, nor be
indifferent toward religions.
The charge of "endorsing irreligion"
asserts that an American citizen must believe in the validity of "religion,"
and further asserts that anyone who questions the spiritual value of religions
is not allowed to express that view without fear of intimidation by religions. Oh, really?!
Many Americans say they are "spiritual, but not
religious." Applying the criteria
of this case, they are all "endorsing irreligion" by saying that they
do not need a religion to have a relationship with God, The Force, The Origin,
The Source, The Supreme Being, The Great Architect, or whatever name they apply
to that concept.
Jesus was a teacher who challenged the tenets of his
own religion. His parents were of the
Jewish faith, he claimed to be the Messiah, and their religion (Judaism) denied his claim.
Jesus made it clear that you did not need a church
or religion to connect with God; He said that the "Kingdom of God" was not to be found outside in the material world, but "within." Religions and churches try to
convince spiritual people, those who believe in a Higher Power, that they must
belong to their religion or church to make their connection to that Higher Power.
When Jesus used the word "church" he was
referring to Himself and he said that his followers were an extension of
Him. He told them to spread his
teachings; he never told anyone to build a church, or mega church; why would
Jesus, who taught the folly of materialism and placing your belief in
"this world" (the brick and mortar) contradict his fundamental tenet
by telling his disciples to build churches, collect money, and hoard riches? (See
Vatican Bank, or the bank accounts of the church leaders.) Who are the "money changers" of today? If Jesus does come back, who would he vent his anger on?
Now, let's deal with the misinterpretation that
Jesus said that he would build his church on Peter, "The Rock."
It was not upon Peter that the church
was to be built, but upon "this rock" The word for
"Peter" in the Greek is 'petros', which means 'a little stone', but
Christ said He would build His Church upon another rock - in the Greek 'petra',
a large rock.
What Jesus meant by the contrast between
the large and small rock was that Peter was one of the stones in the church (I
Peter 2:3-5), but that Christ Himself was the Foundation Stone (I
Corinthians 3:11).
The true "church" is a spiritual house in which every believer is a living stone and Christ is the chief foundation and cornerstone. Paul unambiguously declares that Jesus is the Rock, not Peter (I Corinthians 3:11); and Peter actually denies that he himself is the rock. Read Peter's testimony in I Peter 2:4-8, where he says that he is not the rock, but with all other believers only a little stone in the building of God's spiritual house - the true Church.
[For those of you scoring at home, Jesus said he wanted his brother James to take the role of leader, after he left, but he was pushed off a roof and died.]
Fortunately, Paul was ready to take the teachings and, perhaps thinking too "concretely," he applied his interpretation of the teachings of Jesus and created churches and a religion.
Jesus was frustrated because the disciples, except for Mary Magdalene, his brother James and Judas, were concrete thinkers; they were unable to grasp symbol and metaphor; they were uneducated working class men, who took what Jesus said literally.
That is why Peter and the other apostles became jealous, even
angry, when Jesus would have private conversations with Mary Magdalene, James
and Judas. When Peter confronted Jesus
and in an angry tone and asked why he confided in Mary Magdalene, Jesus tells
him: because 'she gets it'--she can understand the full meaning of my
teachings.
In my opinion, based on my reading of the New Testament, which I understand was selected from many possible "gospels" and edited and re-interpreted by mere mortals over the ages, I would guess that, if Jesus were to return today, he would stand shoulder to shoulder with his fellow teacher.
He would tell the churches, mega churches, TV evangelists and self-promoting
preachers that they have it all wrong.
At best, like Paul, they were concrete thinkers who thought spreading his teachings
meant creating religions and churches. The justification for religions and churches is rooted in the
letters that Paul wrote to the "churches" that he decided to
start. But, if you just read what the
gospels say were the actual words of Jesus, you will wonder why we have
religions and churches at all.
For those of you who would attempt to intimidate me, or any other teacher, know this: As long as I have life, I shall insist on the liberty to pursue happiness by connecting directly to the Higher Power without the interference of any religion or church.
It is democratic heresy to deny us the right to not
believe in your man-made religions
and churches.
So, my fellow sentient beings, I recognize the spark of the
eternal in you; enjoy your freedom of choice to be part of religions and
churches, but, when I'm communicating in my way, in my place, with the Higher
Power, stay out of my way.
