BECAUSE
THEY ENJOY:
escape from the real world,
the structured life,
having to make fewer personal decisions,
gaining converts to their beliefs,
having power over people,
playing the politics of their religion,
authority they would be denied on the outside,
the theological dialogues and arguments,
compensating for past wrongs,
the gossip and visiting,
working out their own salvation,
having power over women,
having power over men,
having power over children,
being the center of attention,
using their talents for singing or music,
using their talents for acting,
being a teacher,
having a chance to study their favorite subjects,
good medical insurance,
the physically easy life,
the trips, vacations, seminars and travel,
being important in town and community,
having political influence in the real world,
making a good living,
helping people work on their problems,
getting a cheap or free education and
escaping from problems on the outside of the church.
Sometimes there are hidden reasons usually centered on greed
or personal pleasures. You may wish to add your own reasons to this list or
delete some. The focus here should be that the life of an educated professor,
minister, priest or rabbi is not a bad life at all. One can enjoy the ministry.
If he is successful, the pay is from median to good. The recognition is
excellent. The opportunity for doing good or bad is excellent. In other words,
the platform and standing of the church is such, in most communities, that the
rabbi, professor, minister or priest has an elevated position in the community.
They are automatically community leaders.
However, they must always walk the tightrope between what
their members want and what their leaders want. They must straddle the line
between their personal convictions and the doctrines and rules of their church.
Now
let us look at the strata of the church. In any church organization, there are
three basic types of division. First, there are the fundamentalists, or
ultraconservatives, which I will call Literalists. Next, there are the middle
or the roaders, which I will call Conservatives. Finally, there are the
progressives, which I will call Liberals.
The
best way to illustrate these three types in the church is to look at how they
view the Bible from which all Christian religions, doctrines, creeds and
denominations stem.
The
Literalists say, "The Bible is the infallible word of God." They
believe some person wrote the Bible when the Holy Ghost of God entered that
person and actually controlled the mind and hand that wrote. Some believe God
actually spoke face to face and spoke some of the words that are written in the
Bible. They print these words in their Bibles in Red. Some of these Literalists
do not understand the process of transcription, translation and
transliteration. They argue their points as though God spoke and argued with
the Jews and early Christians in English. There are absolutely no errors in
God's Word. To them, The Bible Is “The Infallible Word From God To Man.”
The
Conservatives have a little better general education on the whole. They say
this. "The Bible was inspired by God." This means the Holy Ghost
spoke inside of men's head (a revelation), or they felt, or believed he
did. The men listened, then they put what they think
the Ghost said down on paper “in their Own Words.” The Conservatives say there
are still no errors in subject matter in God's Word. They also call the Bible,
“The Word of God.” However, they do acknowledge some of the stories told in the
Bible are not literal within themselves. Instead, there are allegories and
stories told to make a point about morality, ethics, religion or some other
matter.
They
do have a problem though. They cannot Agree on which
of the many stories in the Bible are allegorical and which are literally true.
They say there are some stories that are not to be taken literally. Some quote
the story where the earth stood still (described as the sun standing still).
Some discard the cursing of the fig tree. Some say the whole or parts of the
books of prophecy are simply allegories. Others say this part or that part of
the New or Old Testament is to be considered as an allegory. Some say the
commandment to wash each other’s feet does not belong or apply to them.
(The
word translated "prophet" in the English Bibles is the mistranslation
of the Hebrew word for "poet" and does not refer to seeing the
future.)
Still
others of the Conservatives pick out subjects and consign them to the
allegorical area. Such a subject is "Hell.” Some say all references to a
literal hell should be treated as allegory. Some others even list many of the
events describing the activities of Jesus or Paul as allegorical such as Jesus
cursing the fig tree and feeding a multitude from a small boys lunch. Others
discount the Devil taking Jesus to the mountaintop and showing him all the
kingdoms of the earth. Sometimes some of them say parts of the book, Revelation
of St. John, is allegorical.
Few
Conservatives would subscribe to all of these examples that I have mentioned,
but they would admit one or two. However, each of the Conservative
denominations and churches reject some part of the Bible as not being
applicable to them. If no other example will demonstrate it to you, these two
will. The New Testament and the Old Testament, in numerous places, prohibits
women from even speaking in church. Yet contrary to the explicit instructions
of the Holy Spirit, in almost every Conservative denomination, women are
allowed not only to attend, but to speak, to sing, to teach and in some
denominations even to preach. Has God changed his mind? The Bible gives a
specific commandment to wash each other’s feet. Conservatives reject that as
being too sexy.
In
spite of these areas in the Bible that the Conservatives feel are in some way
not applicable to them, they still insist on calling the Bible, God's Word. To
them the Bible is “God’s Word.”
The
last group, the Liberals, have an even greater difference among themselves than
do the Conservatives. The main unifying factor within the Liberal faction of
the church is this. All will accept the fact the Bible contains Errors of one
sort or another. Like the conservative faction dealing with allegories, the
Liberals differ as to which parts are allegories and which parts are in error.
Again, if you discarded all the parts different Liberal groups feel are in
error, there would be little left of the Bible except a few Proverbs and
Psalms. Some of these Liberals agree to say first, the Bible contains some
teachings inspired by God. And practically all Liberals would accept the
statement that the Bible contains the record of man’s search for God.
So
you see, most would say, (and pay careful attention to this) "The Bible
contains the teachings About God." So actually, the Liberals need to be
divided into two groups:
Those
who say the Bible contains some teachings From God.
Those
who say the Bible contains some teachings About God.
The
last division may or may not believe anything the Bible says about God. Yet,
they are not only a part of each denomination, they are often the strongest
political force in the denomination. In some denominations, the Liberals hold
the leadership power. In others the Conservatives do. In some denominations,
like the Southern Baptist Convention, they forget about living the teachings of
Christ and God's Word. Instead, they Fight and divide over the meaning of those
teachings and there is always a great political war on to see which group
controls the high offices, the money and the schools. In some states, it is the
Liberals. In other states, it is the Conservatives or the Literalists who rule.
How
do these differences in viewing the Bible affect the individual denominations,
their churches, their goals and their activities? Let us look at that for a
moment.
The
goal of the Literalist is to "Save Souls” from the grasp of Hell fire and
Sin. Therefore, the Literalist churches are extremely vocal on the television,
radio and in the community. They are constantly trying to implant the fear of
hell and the guilt of sin ineo the people. Then
without removing that guilt and fear, they seek to save people from the jaws of
everlasting torment, which they can so vividly describe.
Always
the Literalists have a magic formula called, "The Plan of Salvation."
Of course the formula and the plan differs from church to church and
denomination to denomination. In order to be saved you must repeat the magic
formula. They say you must really believe it. Crying helps. Then you must
undergo another magic ceremony such as being pushed under water. While the pushee holds his breath and prays that it will soon be
over, the pusher says another magic formula of his particular denomination.
There are some denominations that simply throw some water on you while they say
the magic formula. The splashee and the pushee get their names written in a book called the Church
Roll, while the splasher or pusher gets to keep his
job as minister of the church a while longer.
The
whole point is to save your black, useless sinful soul and make you a paying
member of that particular church (which they call the Body of Christ). That is
enough on the Literalist.
Now
look at those whom we have labeled Conservative. The aim of the Conservatives
is not only to save your soul, but also to make better individuals. Therefore,
their church program downgrades hell and seeks to play up heaven. They provide
a semblance of personal and family counseling. They run low to median grade
religiously oriented schools. They try to help people solve problems like
family difficulties, smoking, sex out of wedlock, alcoholism, gambling, drug
use, psychological problems and such.
They
seek to help their members and others develop musical skills, athletic skills
and other talents and abilities. All in all, they are not so bad a bunch. I can
agree with many of their programs and good works.
LET ME SAY RIGHT HERE AND NOW,
I AM NOT AGAINST THE GOOD THE CHURCHES DO.
I AM VERY MUCH
FOR IT!
I
am against the religious teachings, which they proclaim as coming straight from
the Almighty God. I am against teaching that if you get right with God you will
have wealth and good health. I am against teaching that the mistakes and wrongs
people do are an eternally damning thing called Religious Sin. This produces
guilt, fear and instability in the gullible and weak-minded. In addition, this
Conservative religious concept actually Retards spiritual and mental growth. I
am against their refusal to let people Think for themselves and to exercise
their God given right to Honest Doubt and Honest Thinking. I am against telling
people they will go to hell if they search for the truth about these matters
and if they think Honestly for themselves. I am against anyone telling people
all the complicated problems of the twentieth or twenty-first centuries were
solved two or three thousand years ago by men that did not know the world was
round and certainly did not know women had rights. I am against people being
told, if they give up the good things of this life (to their religion), God
will give them the good things of a next life.
Finally,
we will look at the Liberals. The goal of the Liberals is to make a better
caring society and world. Consequently, they are heavy, not only in church
politics, but also in local and national politics. Invariably the Liberals are
well educated and often found in high places in the church hierarchy and in the
seminaries and universities. Why does knowledge and education make Liberals? I
will answer that.
Knowledge makes Liberals because,
The more you know the less you can believe.
If
they are preachers, they preach a social obligation of one man to another. They
have a lot to say about love, obligation, responsibility, forgiveness,
education, psychology and the like. They seldom preach on the doctrines of
their church except where they must and when the sermon can be used to get a
social point across. When they do preach on the doctrines, one still does not
know if the preacher is for the doctrine or against it.
These
Liberal ministers, priests and rabbis are heavily into semantics, so they write
out their sermons. In this way they can prove exactly what they said if
questioned. They walk a tight rope between the doctrines of their churches,
which they know are often in error, and their desire to maintain their salary
and be of help to their members. The conservative members gradually leave the
liberal churches and go to another church where the preaching is more to their
taste. The Liberal minister is left with a liberal congregation and usually
plenty of financial support.
The
Conservatives charge that the Liberal church is spiritually dead. The
Literalists say the Liberal church is the church of the Devil. Meanwhile, the
Liberal church is busy making waves in the community. They are bringing about
social changes, political changes, fighting prejudice, fighting greed and
corruption in the government of the church, as well as local and federal corruption.
They are usually champions for the poor, the ignorant, the minorities and the
wronged.
The
Liberals are Not Bible oriented. I have been in liberal services where the only
Bible present was the minister’s Bible and the pulpit Bible. Its marker
remained in the same place week after week. Contrast that to the Literalist and
Conservative churches where it is not unusual to find more Bibles in the place
than people to use them. Many bring their own Bible plus the church has them
placed at close intervals all over the meeting place.
With
this background in mind, I wish to add one more observation. Most Clear
Thinkers in the church began as a Literalist or Conservative. The children of
Liberal Thinkers do not generally enter the ministry. They become doctors,
lawyers, businessmen, scientists, professors, teachers and such. So, the ranks
of Clear Thinkers in the church almost always come from long established family
habits of attending church. It is a big part of their lives. Church often
becomes like a second family, even to those who finally arrive at the freedom
of being Clear Thinkers. They are comfortable and knowledgeable in all areas of
the church. They feel they belong with these friends and neighbors in the
church, and they have an obligation to help their friends solve problems and to
better know the Truth.
How
in the world could men and women brought up in these Literalist and
Conservative churches get to be Clear Thinkers or Free Thinkers?
Almost
without exception these ministers I have known, who are now Clear Thinkers and
still stay in the church, began studying for the ministry in their Literalist
or Conservative church. They believe God called them. They went to a state or
public college, then to seminary. Few of them I know of went first to a
strictly religious institution of higher learning. Does that tell us anything?
Also,
without exception, something within them sincerely wanted to know the truth and
the facts about their religion. They desired to be right in the eyes of God and
in the eyes of man. They were people who thought faith and belief could be and
should be, provable. Faced with the many problems of biblical inconsistencies,
and the contradictory opposing civil and religious histories and doctrinal
problems, they came to a conclusion in their studies. That conclusion was, and
is, Honesty in scholarship leads to Honest
conclusions. They soon came to another truth, which is, it is better to be
Honest than to be Baptist, (or Presbyterian, Assembly of God, Catholic,
Lutheran, Methodist, or fill in your own).
At
this point, these seekers after truth were still very much Christian, but they
could not long remain in that never-never land between Honest
scholarship and belief in most of the Christian doctrines and teachings. The
contrast and tension is too great.
Some
chose to leave the church and others chose to stay in the church and gradually
teach the truth to their church.
Finally,
some chose blind belief and returned to the church with that terrible feeling
that hovers around a person who has seen honesty, freedom and the truth, but
felt the price was too high for them to pay. Those cowards who had the great
opportunity to be free, but returned instead to mental bondage, will daily
experience that terrible feeling that constantly says to them, “something is
wrong here.” And it nags at them every day.
A
sincere drive to prove you are right will neither lead you to the Truth,
nor to the Clear Thinking Philosophy. Only Honest Thinking and Courage will do
that. To try to prove that a belief is true is dishonest. It is a rejection of Honest scholarship. Honesty demands that one shall try to
find out if his belief is true - or not true.
The
best protection religion has against Honest thinking
and Honesty in scholarship, is to cause their members to believe in their
authorities and to accept false information as being true. They must learn to
believe and have faith in unbelievable claims and promises. And they must
become Cowards. Belief continually seeks to hide from honest scholarship.
Belief always seeks to circumvent and block honest thought and honest
investigation. Belief seeks to intimidate its believers by promising dire and
tragic consequences if they search for the Truth. If some believers Do Honestly
examine their doctrines and histories, Cowardliness often prevents most of them
from following what they find and know to be true. No group is more fearful of
the truth than believers in religion (or politics).
Happily,
some of those honest scholars who also had courage, made the decision that
freed them forever. That final decision is the one, which says, "It is
better to be Honest than to be Christian." An honest sincere drive to know
the truth about one's belief will ultimately lead one to the Clear Thought
philosophy of life. I know of no former Christian who ever truly became a Clear
Thinker without sincerely wishing to be right in the eyes of man and God. They
must also have the Honesty, Courage and Willingness to pay the price of Honest
Clear Thinking.
It
is interesting to note that a large portion of present day Atheists were first
Members, Ministers, Priests or Professors in one of the Christian
denominations. Some were also Rabbis. Some of these converts to Clear Thinking
were at first bitter at the church. Much of their early writings and works as
Atheists were simply attacks on the beliefs and doctrines of their former
church. However, as these men and women matured in Clear Thinking they began to
realize that those caught in the sticky traps of religion were victims. As
victims, they were (and are) to be dealt with in a more gentle and humane
manner.
Today
the Atheists of this country seek to explain and help people understand that
Atheism is not a rebellion against God. Rather, Atheism is a rebellion against
the ignorance and injustice that is forced upon people by both religion and
government. Religions and governments use the ignorance of Belief as a weapon
against people to enslave both their minds and their bodies. Belief is the
first and most important weapon used to force tyranny and bondage on people.
So, governments use the ignorance of religious belief as a weapon against its
people, to rally them into war, into unthinking opposition against social
programs, into harmful political programs and such. All of this becomes the
object of Atheistic concern for you. Atheists love you and wish a better and
freer life for you.
Ignorance
is a learned, cultural and programmed condition. A child comes into the world
full of questions and excitement about everything. Religion and government
seeks to dampen that excitement and blunt the child’s honest questions by
making learning and education as boring as possible. Enthusiasm for knowing the
truth about everything must be stifled by claiming that only religious and
governmental authorities can really understand things. They will give you the
“truth” about everything so you do not have to worry or even Think
about anything.
The
authorities wish to make everyone dependent upon them. They cover ignorance with
a thin veneer of lies and half-truths and call it education. They then use that
thinly veiled ignorance to fill their churches, their military, their
government positions, their government programs and their pockets. You deserve
better!
Now let us look at how a Clear Thinker Honestly views the
Church and how he views those Clear Thinkers who remain in the church.
Thomas E. Blaylock
Copyright: 1989
Updated: 07/29/2010
Next: Clear Thinking in the Church
