The Meaning of Religion and the ABSENCE of God

One of the ironies of Religion is that so much of IT has been started by individuals and maintained by people with no Belief in any god.

Abraham, the OT/Tanahk tells us, arose out of Ur "with his gods". He did not start Monotheism, he was polytheistic, like most people trying to explain things they did not understand.

Buddha initiated the 2d great "Religion". 2500 years ago, Buddha denounced the concept of divinity--from Hindu hordes of spirits to the idea of a single omnipotent god. As for the idea of Heaven or Hell, or having a "relationship with God" he taught spirituality without referencing such absurd concepts.

Jesus, whose name is suspiciously Latin, was never worshiped as a god by any of the people who actually "witnessed" him, the Jews and a few Samaritans. After his death, Christianity spread peacefully throughout the collapsing Roman Empire.

Mohammed repeatedly gainsays his own divinity. Yet his followers idolize him and boldly disobey the words of the Allah conveyed in the Quran. Terrorists clearly reject "Islam", which is submission. Virtually all suicide and roadside bombers today purport to act in the name of Islam, but all have failed to show ANY directive from Allah to do what they do. The Quran promises no "virgins" for an assassin's pleasure in Heaven. Allah is described as a creator, including Jews and Gentiles, and that investment is contradicted by the act of murder.

Buddhism grew from a tiny religious community in northern India into a movement that spans the globe. This happened peacefully. When Arabs came into contact with Buddhism, they stopped their initial expansion by the sword. Islam immediately enjoyed a much bigger expansion peacefully--through India and all the way to Indonesia--than it had previously taken by force across the thinly populated desert of northern Africa.

Mormonism, remarkably similar to Islam in its formation and growth pattern, has also grown considerably. From a divinely-inspired but violent origin, its practitioners took up the practical arts and crafts and spread across the globe.

It is as if we come full circle. Abraham unites us all as "lost tribes" with no common language and makes us all one tribe moving to new places. Buddha points us toward serenity and a satisfying life. Other thinkers add the idea of Love (Jesus), peaceful submission (Mohammed), and community building (LDS).

And now we are back to trying to understand each other, from different tribes and different tongues, to find our common tribe. And no one has claimed to have heard from any god, of any ilk, for a hundred years. There are still individuals who invoke Religion and then commit un-saintly acts, none of which are justified by any Scripture. While several Religions have experienced paroxysms of violence, not one of the four great Religions has expanded significantly as a result of violence.

And not one of the deistic cults claims to have any evidence of any recent communication. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all invoke the SAME deity (arguably or intermittently Yahweh/Jehovah/God/Allah/Ishtar). All of their "Scriptures" are presaged by stories written on clay tablets by those people in Ur who worshiped a female trinity symbolized by the thin crescent moon on a green field. This round gently-curved breast symbol is now ironically and alternatively usurped as a symbol of Allah, and the Virgin Mary.

We are all Buddhists. We are all Unitarian Universalists, even if many of us do not know it. We are all the Lost Tribes of Israel, found our way home together even IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PILLAR OF FIRE! We are the devoted Saints in the presence of each other. We sanctify what we do not destroy.

I urge all Religious Believers to attend: Almost all Belief is contrary to almost all Religious Tradition.

Book: "JESUS; the man who lives" by Malcomb Muggeridge

This work is a wonderful walk through the biographical portions of the first four Gospels, with full-page Art illustrations. Our "St. Mugg" provides the narrative company of a perpetually skeptical but late to his ardency, Believer. Muggeridge does note that no historical sources outside of the Gospels are available to corroborate anything said or done by Jesus. [To date, the actual existence of Jesus remains uncorroborated by real or direct evidence. He left no artifact or archeology or contemporary record. This lacuna is highlighted by the forged insertion into Josephus' history.]

The three chapters explore His Coming, His Teachings, and His Dying and Living. The Teachings of Jesus should be of interest to everyone, and they are honestly quoted and helpfully explored -- admitting to the obscurities. Jesus presents no theology, no law, nor even a Church.

"The religion Jesus gave the world is an experience, not a body of ideas or principles. It is in being lived that it lives, as it is in loving that the love which it discloses at the heart of all creation become manifest." [71]

The study is as comprehensive as the Gospels themselves. Intense, even comparative across these sources, noting the discrepant versions of events and parables -- for example, the three very different versions of the spikenard episode: "When Jesus was in Bethany with Lazarus, [who he had previously raised from the dead when Martha sent for Jesus to advise him that his beloved had died]... while Martha was preparing supper, Mary took a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and annointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair..." [124].

The emphasis is on what actual sins are, and that sin is rarely what the authorities say it is -- for example, Jesus roundly abuses hypocrisy -- the Pharisees "who say and do not" -- as the worst possible offense.[130]

Those of us not given to power over others or to accumulations of material things, will be gratified by Muggeridge's faithful recitation and explosion of the Beatitudes, and in particular, the bits about the poor and the meek. On the eve of of his crucifiction at Gethesemane -- this must be important -- Jesus told a lawyer to sell everything, give the proceeds to the poor, and "follow me". [114]. Jesus repeats this "distribute unto the poor" admonishment to his close friends, Lazarus, Martha and Mary.[116] If a "Christian" is one who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, then there cannot, cannot, be more than a few dozen Christians in the world today. What a hypocrite professes makes the point.

A light on St. Mugg's own conversion is shed in the summary of Jesus' teachings provided by Jesus himself:

"Jesus summarized all his teaching for us in two great propositions which have provided Christendom with, as it were, its moral and spiritual axis...: 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and the second, like unto it: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' On these two commandments, he insisted, hang all the law and the prophets. His manner of presenting them indicates their interdependence; unless we love God we cannot love our neighbour, and, correspondingly, unless we love our neighbour we cannot love God. Once again, there has to be a balance...".[130]

"The simple fact is that to be truly loved God has to become a Man without thereby ceasing to be God. Hence Jesus, ... Thus the two commandments become one...". [133]

Here we may have but the core of Muggeridge's conversion to Catholicism late in life.

Of course, he managed at the end to regain his certainty that Faith had no meaning, and died knowing there was no immortality or God. But that is another book, not this one. Much of the grace and gratitude of the religion which St. Mugg did so brilliantly express is so in this one.

Christians? If only.

WAS JESUS A CHRISTIAN?

Christianity has been taken over by their tithe-masters. Jesus Christ would not recognize the monster parading as "christian religion" today. The teachings of Jesus Christ come down to us through "copies" and hearsay, but regardless of the provenance -- which is moot on this point -- the heuristic body of teachings are closer to Manichean Buddhism and the Dalai Lama, than to the "Trinitarian" polydeism taught today in Churches. Most Churches today are not "fundamentalist" at all.

The revenant Gospels of Jesus Christ repeat and repeat and repeat a message of love. The fresh and vital core of the Christian gospel is inclusion, empathy, unity, and grace. There is no suggestion that greed is good. No parable of salvic vengence. Above all, from swaddled babe in a manger to crucified savior, Jesus is completely silent on the subjects of Homosexuality and Abortion. Both were as widely practiced then as today.

In fact, in the descriptions of Jesus and his disciple John "the beloved", it is clear that Christ was a practicing homosexual. He never married and never had children. He never mentions tithing. He does not urge his followers to give money to rich evangelists; he repeatedly suggests giving money to poor people, NOT to rich people. Wealth is an express disqualification to the Kingdom of Heaven.

WAS ST. PAUL A CHRISTIAN?

With St. Paul, we do not even have an issue with provenance. We have authentic letters written by a documented historical figure. In his letters, he does not pretend to have ever been attracted to people of the female persuasion, he repeatedly introduces his male traveling companion as "my beloved". He never married and never had children.

St. Paul preached a redemptive message of love and inclusion. He risked his life to take this message to people who were hostile -- walking and talking among them without weapons or threats.

WAS ST. AUGUSTINE A CHRISTIAN?

In his Confessions, the Berber St. Augustine writes of "The Mysterious Force of Memory", and its tie to Guilt, which keeps us from Grace. Augustine speaks of PRIDE as the most sinful of all temptations. None worse.

Augustine wrote a lot, and we have his entire library -- it was preserved from barbarian depredations "as if by miracle" -- according to his surviving lover. Augustine develops the Creation story and the Trinity as forms of analogy; not "literal" but logical. Foremost in his analysis is the use of Reason--which he can only conclude is "God-given". He elevates the role of Mary in the salvation of human kind, recognizes the pastoral authority of women, and rejects millenarianism.

As important as Augustine is to Christian orthodoxy, curiously, he is of no help in explaining the current obsession with (1) homosexuality, and (2) abortion.

(1) HOMOSEXUALITY. Augustine was gay. When his mother pressured him to marry, the only honorable solution available to him was to become a monk. His active homosexuality (there is really no question he was plagued his entire life with carnal desires) was succored and forgiven behind the cloistered walls with the privity of his friends. The outside world was as hostile to homosexuality then (in Africa) as it is today.

(2) ABORTION. Augustine did not believe abortion was murder, or that human life begins with conception. The fetus was not "en-souled", and therefore was not human. He preached the salvic importance of baptism, and yet he did not advocate baptism for fetuses.

CONCLUSION

Today's professed Christians have been taken over by tyrants. These tyrants live on tithe-taking, that is, by filling the sheep with fears and then extorting them for money.

The present Church preaches almost NOTHING about the terrible terrible damning SIN, which is PRIDE. Worse, the Church actively preaches two divisive heretical errors about Life. The BIBLICAL TRUTH as construed by Jesus Christ, St. Paul, and St. Augustine is:

Homosexuality is sexuality, it is not sin;
Abortion is death, it is not murder.

Larry Craig, booked and pled guilty, taking a "wide stance" in a men's room

Curiously, a Republican Party which almost unanimously took the position that a Blow Job was "sexual intercourse" -- which would surprise most people who look up actual definitions and the definitions which were in play during Clinton's deposition -- is now claiming that expressly signaling for a Blow Job from a cute blonde police decoy is not "solicitation". I do not know why we bother with "definitions". People make up their minds based on ideology, prejudice and politics.

It is obvious that "family values" are not, and probably never have been, maintained by the elites who run things.

Where is the "moral outrage" of the Conservatives now? Jesus never directly decried the practices of Man-Loving. Read carefully about John the Beloved. It is not good enough to say that he adverted to the teachings of the Prophets, and some of them lived in a society which made homosexuality a capital offense. Or not -- there is a huge translation issue here, but it should be obvious to everyone that homosexuality is simply NOT one of the Ten Commandments. By ANY interpretation.

Jesus was not subtle, however, in condemning hypocrisy. Or untempered condemnation -- "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone", is the sound bite most of us come away with.

Parable of the Pounds, with Slaying for Jesus

Did Jesus exhort his followers to kill his enemies? On his way for the last time to Jerusalem, Jesus tells the Parable of the Pounds. This message is broadly delivered to the crowd, not just to Zacchaeus, his host. The wisdom character in the story -- and it is clear that it is not Jesus, but this King in his parable -- says "As for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me!" [RSVP, Luke 19:27; in Phillips, "execute them in my presence"; in NEB "slaughter". Clearly it is physical, murderous, without a tribunal, and personal.]

First, we should note that this murdering bit is unique to Luke, and not any of the other Gospel authors who tell the same story of Jesus' entry into Jerusalem, with all which that implies.

The ending verse appears to have no relationship to the somewhat strange "Parable of the Pounds" which Jesus has just related to people who were hanging upon his every word. Remember that this parable of the pounds, given to us only by Luke, is similar to the parable of the talents related by Matthew--25:14-30. Some scholars think that Luke combined the Matthew story with another involving gaining of a kingdom. In any event neither of the related parables, nor this synthesis, seem to need to have anyone getting slaughtered, and the risk appears unrelated to the matters at stake--talents and pounds (equivalent to the Greco-Syrian mina, or about 100 drachmas, worth 20-35 dollars).

I cannot help but mention that Christian scholars for the most part simply ignore the last verse. (Harpers' Bible Commentary 1037). Perhaps during wildly retributive episodes in the past, the good Church Fathers dearly invoked this instruction. But lately, Christians have calmed down. Not much slaying, in spite of what Jesus said.

The next thing Luke turns to in his story of Jesus' final trip to Jerusalem, with all that implies, is stealing a virgin colt for the ride into town. Did we mention going into Jerusalem, with all that implies? The sight of the city moves Jesus to tears. But other than that, it is peace and joy all around. By the time Jesus mounts the colt [in Luke it is a colt, not an ass], the crowd is rejoicing and throwing their clothing down on the ground, as they do, 2 Kings 9:13. Luke does not mention olive or palm branches, but the disciples were raising a great praise, and when Pharisees tell Jesus to rebuke the noise-makers, Jesus assures them that if the disciples were silent, then "the very stones would cry out" [RSV; "burst out cheering" Phillips]. Did we mention Jerusalem? Jesus predicts that the city would be destroyed "and they will leave not one stone upon another in you". Of course Luke is privy to fact that Rome's "final solution" was to enslave all the Jews, force them to dismantle the largest fortified city in the world, and then exile all of them, and rename Judea (the land of Jews), "Palestine".

Did we mention the great entrance into Jerusalem?

Getting Back to God the Forgotten Son and wholly irrelevant Spirit

The leadership of this bustly world is involved in many interesting things and most of them have "got it" that there is a connection, and probably a valid one, between their manifest notions of success and money. What is abundantly clear, of course, to anyone with eyes and ears picking up the signals all about, is that the leadership of the entire globe is busy doing things other than what was taught, painstakingly, by The Buddha, Jesus Christ, or Mohammad, to name but three of the "spiritual" leaders who continue to be invoked, and who could not be less relevant to anything that is happening.

Can this be any clearer? No one can miss this. The observation is Fact -- What was taught, the content, by the so-called Spiritual Guides, is now utterly forgotten if it was ever remembered, AT THE TOP. The rest of us, the fumbling masses, the tired and hungry, the lotus-eaters among us, the retired, the spun-dry, whether we "believe" or have Faith, or not, at least we must see that our Leaders, across continents, across cultures and classes, none of them have what could be called any "religious Faith".

An example? You were waiting to hear from George Bush? He has claimed that Jesus Christ, no less, is his "model" and "hero". Yet, in his Presidency, in his decision-making as the "Decisioner", has George Bush performed a single act consistent with The Message of that Messiah? What part of "War" do you not understand?

Bush makes empty claims to a "religious" basis or justification for what he has done. It is impossible that anyone, even he, could "believe" there is any connection however remote or slight between what he has done and what Christ taught.

Another example? Bin Laden, of course. He claims to invoke the Quran, and even more than Bush (who almost never cites the Bible or indicates the slightest familiarity with the Gospel text), often quotes from the Quran. Unfortunately, his "quotes" are often inapt or incorrect. Not a single line of God's guidance delivered to Mohammad justifies suicide, war against unarmed innocents, repression of women, drug-profiteering (opium in Afghanistan!), tribal slaughter among Sunni and Shiite, or even the outright theft from the Jews who were only recently hounded out of their ancient homes to the profit of the Mullahs and other hypocrites after centuries of peaceful and prosperous cohabitation with the descendants of Mohammad from Persia through Babylon all the way to Granada. Jews Greeks Arabs Scythians and other smaller groups lived for Centuries of peace, literally creating a Golden Age presided over by a poetic and Learned Islam which EARNED the laurels upon which the ignorant Wahabi "warriors" now seek to sit.

There is no doubt that Arabs are important people. Not their warriors -- their old men waving weapons. The important Arabs are the engineers. Building the most beautiful cities in the world. They will hang gardens in Babylon once again. Gilgamesh Found.