Politics, Religion, Abortion, Use of Force and the Will of God

There is in this world of concepts, ideas, and theories hardly any more absurd and therefore dangerous notion, than the idea of forced patriotism or forced religion. History is absolutely overwhelmed with tales of the horror and ultimate futility of those who attempted to force religion and politics onto others, others that is, who were simply living their lives according to their own ways and manners. As far back as written history can take us we find the pain and anguish dealt out onto those unfortunate “others” by the ones who felt that it was their place in life to impose their beliefs on mankind. Being expansionists these dominators have pushed their politics, their religion and their grand schemes of conquering nature and building monuments for themselves, their government, their religion, customs and fashions on anyone that they could. There are those who were coerced or enslaved into their service, and for those who would not comply, they were subjected to ostracism, torture and death.

As we study, we have seen in both ancient and recent history, the brutality of political ideologues across the world. Some have been attached to recognized religious organizations and some, as in the communist regimes of the USSR and China, were not so aligned, instead making the idolatry of the state the belief system that the oppressors recognized as the supreme entity. From the walls of Babylon to the wall being constructed on the Southern line of the US border, empires have demanded, when they could, obedience to the king or the commander. Throughout history more often than not, religion in one form or the other, assisted government in controlling power and people. Being tightly interwoven with kingdoms and empires, they survive and thrive for a time, in a mutual relationship where the king commands the body of his servants and slaves while the church takes charge to own the immortal soul of those in captivity.

The state made its earthly bargain with the people and religion promised the spiritual. While both employed the carrot and the stick, where the promise of the carrot failed the hard reality of the stick was close behind. As social creatures, the benefit of a life lived in the security and company of others was and is easy to see and understand. Life in any village however requires a certain respect and consideration towards the others and some compromise will surely occur, but living together does not need to be confused with forced patriotism, which is a mental exercise rather than a necessary social construct. Religion too is a mental experience that need not be forced on anyone by society in that freedom to worship is not a social function either, there is no need to compromise or conform in belief unless crossed by someone who’s religion suggests that they should force that belief system on another. But after thousands of years of the unholy alliance between religion and the state, many people today would have a difficult time telling where government ends and religion begins, and an equally difficult time in finding the mental freedom to live independently of those alliances forced in the name of patriotism and religion. The indoctrination of children in many homes begins immediately which completes another form of force, the forcing of ideas and standards through the most subtle device, which is simple education and cultural transference of ideas and customs. It takes an unusual effort to free the mind from such indoctrination and a good bit of wisdom and luck when attempting to live free of governmental or religious persecution.

For our present purpose let’s focus on European governments and the Christian church so we might explore, study and understand the lead-up to our situation here in the US and in some cases, around the world in the year 2020.

Jesus was born in Nazareth which was a small village in Galilee which, in turn was part of ancient Palestine which had been under Babylonian, Egyptian, Israeli, Persian, Greek and Roman control at various times. At the time of Jesus, Galilee was a Roman territory with a Roman king, Herod Antipas.
The Roman Empire was quite extensive and as extensive modern day empires are prone to do, a ruler, governor or king would be established to lord over an area. As long as the locals stayed within the Roman law and accepted their subservience to the Empire things went along in relative peace. This is the Pax Romania which became a model for future empires such as the modern US Empire.

Jesus arrives on the scene, born in Bethleham and decides to take on the Jewish authorities much like the prophets before him and much like Martin Luther would do some 1500 years later when he brought the Reformation to the doors of the Catholic Church. Leaving the mysterious elements of the Christ in Jesus behind for a moment we can examine the life of Jesus from a political perspective. Although Jesus was not a political reformer as such his human existence would end because of a political question that was put forth by the Jewish leaders who were quite political in both their internal and external affairs, using the power and force of Rome to silence Jesus the religious reformer. Jesus’s message to the Jewish authorities of his time was much like the calls for reformation through history up to the present time. Jesus called out the hypocrisy of authoritarian rulers within the Jewish community for placing their faith and trust in man-made laws, social hierarchies, rituals and customs while forgetting the true nature of the God that the Jews claimed to worship, the God of Love. Jesus criticized the Jewish authorities for putting their man-made kingdom above Gods kingdom. Jesus then sealed his fate by declaring a very ancient notion that he and this God of Love were of one mind and one body. This outraged the Jewish authorities who in their own vanity had forgotten that according to their own tradition, they too were the Sons and Daughters of the great Jehovah. For this impudence, or blaspheme as they called it, Jesus was hauled before the Roman court where they asked that Jesus should be put to death. And he was.

At the time of his death, the followers or friends of Jesus evidently were numbered in the hundreds along with those 11 disciples who remained. They tried to carry-on as a small group of now rebellious outsiders or “believers” as they seem to have called themselves, and were hunted down by the authorities for those beliefs. This is where the more mysterious elements of the Jesus story kick in with the believers talk of the resurrected Jesus ascending into heaven. This small group of believers then was and still is “the Church of Jesus Christ”.

From what we know, Jesus left no instructions for his church other than that they should love each other, love their neighbors and love Their God. Some think that Jesus established his church around St. Peter because of his saying in reference to Peter, “Upon this rock I will build my church”, but that is not to say that Peter was to build up an organization that would become “The Church”. It was the rock of Peter’s faith, the faith that Jesus saw in Peter that the church was to be built upon, not on Peters position as an authority figure.

Paul of Taursus then joins the procession making himself a self-declared leader of the church and proceeds, along with Peter to do the ever so human task of attempting to control the church, to build-up an organization that is. Even then there was talk of division and anti-christ elements with the church (And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God; and such is the spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come, and even now already it is in the world. 1 John 4:3) and between that and the persecution that began to follow these Christian rebels the natural splintering of the group began with some taking positions of authority while other, more independently minded, non-political Christians faded into the background.

As social and religious rebels are often used, Christians of all sorts were then scapegoated for any number of reasons and having no earthly protections and no friends among the ruling class they became the prey of the empire and suffered greatly for their belief. This persecution that they were enduring brought them together spiritually but also forced them underground just as you might see in any group that is being persecuted by the ruling class.

In 324 AD after a civil war within the Roman Empire, Constantine became the Emperor of Rome. Although he lived most of his life as a Pagan he converted to Christianity on his deathbed. Before his own conversion Constantine had already come to the aid of the persecuted Christians. He helped in promoting the Edict of Milan in 313, he produced what is known as the Nicene Creed which was a record of Christian belief, he committed himself to the building of The Church of the Holy Scelpechur and gave power over the Western Empire to the pope. With this “Donation of Constatine” as it was called we had the beginnings of the alliance between the Roman Empire and the Church of Jesus, referred to still to this day, as The Holy Roman Empire. With this unholy alliance between the Roman Empire and what was then going about as The Christian Church we had our first Christian government and the corruption of the church, the anti-christ that is, came into power.

The history of the Holy Roman Empire and what came to be known as the Catholic Church is long and hard, from corruption to corruption from terror to terror. It is an organization that could hardly if ever be associated with Jesus of Galilee, the man who died on the cross for challenging the authorities of his day, even unto his death. The Catholic Church corrupted both the teachings of Jesus and the spirit of Jesus taking those spiritual things and turning them into false idols of silver, gold, brick and mortar, and corrupted teachers of men, power brokers and lovers of empire rather than lovers of God.

This new alliance of church and state ran roughshod over most all of Europe right up until the Reformation of Martin Luther whose goal was to free Christians from papal authority and what was seen as corruption throughout the church. This reformation was in part an answer to the inquisitions that were taking place as the Catholic Church saw people pulling away from the corruption of their Church, searching for a less cumbersome, less authoritarian church that would go back to the simpler teachings of Jesus, a church outside of the Holy Roman Empire and theoretically, closer to the original teachings of Jesus.

But by now the corruption had run deep, very deep and the liberty and free relationship between man and God taught by Jesus was now buried under loads of dogma and the tendency to rely on the works and teachings of men rather than the pure connection of heart and mind that was exhibited by Jesus Christ. There is no record of any but the major historical personalities throughout all this time but I find it so very easy to imagine a church of Jesus Christ that was running under the attention and notice of the Emperors, popes and protestant reformers of those times. As you will find today if you venture out to those un-safe places, under bridges and on the streets where you will meet them, there is a church that is as strong and faithful as any you will ever find. There is throughout the world, a body of believers in Jesus Christ. They have no temples, no popes or pastors, no clergy, no schools or fundraisers, no hierarchy, no earthly power and no corruption. If you ever hand some money to some beggar on some street corner and they look you in the eye and say to you, God bless you, you will have met one of these ones.

The Doctrine of Discovery and the Conquest of the World:
The joining of Church and State had many consequences for day to day life and those “commoners” who fell under its power as governments, now with religious authority backing their military authority, which was backed by both real violence and threats of violence from those same powers and principalities. All this must have been taken in stride, as much and as often as was possible, as it still is today by non-power seeking regular type people, but as Europeans began to stretch out to explore and conquer the world, they took with them the support of their governments and the blessing of the Church in the form of The Doctrine Of Discovery.

The Doctrine of Discovery was a series of papal bulls or decrees that according to historical records first stared taking shape sometime around 1100. In 1455 pope Nicholas issued the Romanus Pontifix giving Portugal a monopoly over all of African trade which “legally” started the trading of human slaves. In 1493 pope Alexander gave the world the Inter Caetera which gave the kings of Europe legal authority over Africa, Asia, Australia, New Zealand and the Americas. These decrees from the various popes involved, essentially gave European monarchs under the authority of the Roman Church, the blessing and “legal” protection of The Church as they sent their explorers out into the world to conquer and dominate in the name of The Church. This doctrine gave the European monarchs the license to subjugate and murder millions of indigenous people across the globe and has never been recanted by the monarchs or the Church.

As protestants migrated crossed the seas, some seeking freedom from religious and government oppression as we were taught in our public schools they in large part, left behind the authority of popes and kings but they held onto the ideology and the by then, broadly accepted doctrines of the church and state which allowed them in their hearts and minds the conquest of these millions and millions of indigenous peoples who were, like the recently murdered Breonna Taylor, in their own homes minding their own business. The Church by now has moved so far away from the teachings of Jesus that it has become the habitat and tool of every kind of devil ever imagined by those who watch for devils.

As the framers of the US constitution began their work they took care to leave in place, without coming right out and saying it, the idea that if someone was not a convert to Christianity in some form or the other, a heathen or savage as they suddenly became called, it was perfectly fine to steal their land, rob their children, rape their wives and murder anyone who stood in their way. It was commonly understood that these newly transplanted Europeans had the heavenly ordained right and privilege to conquer, in whatever manner necessary, the entire world, their only obstacle to complete domination would be the competing powers and principalities within their own sphere of European influence.

In 1823 as new countries were forming with the conquest of Central and South America, freeing themselves from mostly Spanish, Portuguese and French authority, James Monroe the 5th president of the US decided to put an end to threats of further European intrusion in the Western hemisphere but it was also made clear that the US would not interfere in European conquest in other parts of the world. The US by this time has fully cemented its right to own and dominate the entire Western hemisphere under a new flag and a new religion which was the combination of old European Catholic and Protestant religions joined together with the newly developed Enlightenment movement promoted by modern Europeans and Americas founding fathers. The idea of manifest destiny has now taken full root in the Western mind giving Europeans a guilt free path to conquer and dominate.

Unfortunately the actions of these newly enlightened ones did not match the rhetoric of their proclamations which rightly called for liberty and justice for all and for religious freedom on the conquered land they now possessed through various means. These declarations, as we know, though beautifully written did not recognize the freedom of more than half of the world’s population, leaving out the natives, all men but the white European men themselves, and leaving in subjugation all women from every background and culture. The hypocrisy of the United States was effectively canonized by both the Declaration of Independence and further established by the Monroe Doctrine. The Protestant and Catholic churches in the Western hemisphere, now fully established and powerful in their own right went along, hand in hand, with this ideology and have continued to support it except in a few cases such as the abolitionist movements and in some fringe elements of today’s modern church. The Church therefore, as it is commonly understood and accepted, is completely outside of Christian teaching when in support of these governments and anti-Christ doctrines.

It’s no secret that we are today facing a turmoil and disagreement that is tearing the United States apart and not in some clearly defined line like the old Mason/Dixon line that separated the Northern states from the Southern states. The line in today’s division is not so much geographical or political in that old sense of the word, as it is an ideological separation and because of those who make it so, it is also a religious battle. By that I mean those who by their own admission state that their overall point of view and point of action, is based on their religious beliefs.

In the US that would predominantly mean what is called the Evangelical Christian Church which is composed of Christians from most every denomination, both Catholic and protestant. In particular, where religion meets today’s politics, that group is represented in the person of Donald Trump with Mike Pence standing back and standing by in solidarity like some ghoulish specter cautiously waiting while observing the Mad Man going about his task of destroying the country in the name of God. These men are the current champions of the religious right, a place formerly held by George Bush who had his picture on the cover of popular magazines praying to the God of these “Christians”. Trump and Pence were brought into power in large part by and through the works of what is called Dominion politics. Dominion politics is on full display on the sorely overlooked Christain radio programs being broadcast on the public airwaves across the US. The belief that drives this movement is that we are living in what is commonly described as “the end times” and that it is the duty of these Dominionists to make the world right for Jesus before he returns, to set the stage and usher in the time as described in The Revelation of Saint John. The political ramification is then that their idea of what constitutes preparing the way for Jesus overrides any constitution because as they will tell you, Jesus is The Lord and they are his servants.

So what we are witnessing here in the US is not only an attempt to overthrow the constitution but also the very idea of a democratic republic such as our own in that in their eyes, Jesus is Lord, not found in the individual man or a majority of the nation represented by a constitutionally bound congress, court or executive. This is taking religion over government in a most obvious and abusive manner. You can find and may have seen in this country, church flagpoles with the flag of these dominionists flying above the American flag as a statement of their earthly priorities.

So above and beyond that, as we consider this movement in both the political and the religious sphere, some might be critical of the way in which these fanatics are attempting to continue the overthrow and own the Christian Church. According to Christian theology, Christians are to be in a state of prayerful waiting for salvation with and through their faith in Jesus. As Christians they are not burdened with the task of building on Earthly Kingdoms or with the job of setting the stage for Armageddon. This all too human desire to conquer and dominate again goes completely against Christian teaching as dominating the US government with religious ideology goes completely against constitutional law.

Jesus himself was offered the kingdoms of the world by Satan. (Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to Him, “All these things I will give you if you will fall down and worship me.”

 Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only will you shall serve.”)

Jesus refused power over the kingdoms of this world as his purpose was not to become a mere earthly king but the salvation of mankind through redemption and grace, through faith and love, a returning to the Godhead by the people. God’s kingdom was not to be based on the avarice and prideful passions of men or on strategically built governments and empires that relied on the use of force to bring the heathen into submission. For if there is anyone who would know the futility of trying to achieve salvation through the building of empires and the laws of government, it would be this One we so inadequately refer to as God. Because even you and I in our great ignorance of knowing all things to be known, know that you cannot force anyone to love something that they do not love. It is impossible to force a love of country or a love of God onto anyone, simply impossible.

Submission cannot be mistaken for love, and patriotism and religion both require true, un-pretended, un-forced love to be patriotism or religion at all. Our all too human “fore-fathers” were onto something when they wrote the separation of church and state into our Constitution, they were onto the idea and the concept that men must come to their religion, to their “enlightenment” that is through the processes of logic and reason in each individual heart and mind. The ideas of Jefferson at least, whose ideas won the day when establishing the separation of church and state, were that men were basically good and that given room to explore, examine, be educated and then to reflect and act on logic and reason, that they would, under their own power of thinking, grow closer to truth, which would bring us better living societies, which would then bring us closer to our Creator. This idea or philosophy is of course not unique to Jefferson though we can certainly thank him for being sure that it was included in the overall philosophy and laws of the new country they were trying to form.

This philosophy was also promoted by such social and religious thinkers as Dr. M. L. King Jr. when he spoke of the Arc of Justice and then by the entire discourse of The Bible itself as it presents to the reader a story that moves through time, from man’s creation to his fall from grace and awakening to the knowledge of good and evil, to his ultimate reunion with God. So God himself has allowed for the growth and experience that brings a person to him and the reunion is not something contrived or forced and certainly not forced by the hands of preachers, kings or tyrants.

Let’s move now to something more specific, let’s look at one of those chronically divisive issues in the Country, abortion. The debate behind this issue is both political and religious as it is presented by some and often understood by many. This issue is the driving force behind those Evangelist Christians and Dominionists that are attempting a political coup in the USA. I believe that this anti-abortion stance, though inciting true feelings of concern in many people, is purely a political move by Dominionist Republicans made to draw power to their Dominionist Republican power play and cause.

As we do with so many of our day to day challenges, we tend to think of abortion as a modern-day problem but it is not anything new. Abortions have been a fact of life going back to those days before the recording of history. In Roman history for instance we find the commonly accepted practice of leaving unwanted children to the unsympathetic power of nature. Destroying children with deformities or handicaps was recommended by such figures as Cicero and Aristotle who wanted this infanticide to be required by law. It is evident that the woman who was capable of bearing children was considered more important or necessary to society than any particular child she might produce.

Abortions were, as they still are, dangerous, even possibly deadly for the woman who might have one so it’s conceivable that bringing a child to full term and birth may have been preferred to abortions. In Jewish law killing a baby still inside the womb by another in an act of violence was punished by demanding a fine but for a woman to abort her own child it was “if a woman travails to give birth [and it is feared she may die], one may sever the fetus from her womb and extract it, member by member, for her life takes precedence over his” (Oho. 7:6). This is the case only as long as the fetus has not emerged into the world, when it is not a life at all and “it may be killed and the mother saved” (Rashi and Meiri, Sanh. 72b). Jewish law as generally understood, did not think of a fetus as being fully human until its head emerged from the womb.

In the US abortions have been legal across the country since January of 1973 when the Supreme Court decided the case of Roe versus Wade where it was decided that a woman’s right to privacy was guaranteed under the 14th amendment to the constitution. Before that time, during those days of very little over-sight in women’s private affairs, during the time of highly independent pioneers and the necessary ability to take matters into one’s own hands, abortions were certainly an element of life but due to the puritanical custom of not discussing “delicate issues” and in the spirit of independence, it seems to have been mostly ignored by society especially by those pioneers who really did have to take matters into their own hands. The customs of those rough and ready pioneers had a major impact on the overall outlook and tendencies of American society right up until the 60s when, due to the influence of mass-media, and as the culture became more homogenous and then more heavily scrutinize due to proximity and social organization things began to change.

In “A Brief History of Abortion Law” we find that, “When US states did begin banning abortion in the 19th century, doctors seeking to drive out traditional healers, or in their words, quacks, often led the way. They had help from nativists who were concerned about women’s growing independence and the country’s growing diversity. Contemplating the colonization of the West and South in 1868, anti-abortion campaigner Dr. Horatio R. Storer asked if these frontiers would be “be filled by our own children or by those of aliens? This is a question our women must answer; upon their loins depends the future destiny of the nation.” Who would control those loins, and indeed whose childbearing is considered desirable, lay at the heart of regulations on abortion and contraception across the centuries.

The laws every state passed by 1880 banned abortions in all cases but for “therapeutic reasons” that were largely left up to the medical practice and the legal system to determine. In practice, that meant wealthier women with better access to doctors had abortions, while other women bled. “One stark indication of the prevalence of illegal abortion was the death toll,” writes Rachel Benson Gold of the Guttmacher Institute. “In 1930, abortion was listed as the official cause of death for almost 2,700 women—nearly one-fifth (18 percent) of maternal deaths recorded in that year.” Fatalities began decreasing with the advent of antibiotics to treat sepsis, but this too depended on one’s status. “In New York City in the early 1960s,” Benson Gold notes, “1 in 4 childbirth-related deaths among white women was due to abortion; in comparison, abortion accounted for 1 in 2 childbirth-related deaths among nonwhite and Puerto Rican women.”

A Brief History of Abortion Law by Irin Carmon

It is a fact that the survival rate for women in the US has greatly improved since modern medicine became widespread. It is also a fact that the number of abortions in the U.S. has been steadily decreasing after its peak in 1990. Statistics show that the number of reported abortions in 1973 was 615,831. There was a steady increase in the numbers up until the end of the decade where the numbers climbed to slightly over a million through the 80’s peaking out in 1990 at 1,429,247, then the numbers began to, just as steadily, drop down to 623,471 which 7,640 more abortions than what were counted in 1973. This might lead us to believe that after the initial freedom to abort was again legal and realized, we possibly began to do something right in providing both protections for women while simultaneously reducing the number of abortions, and indeed, we are! The reason the number of abortions is going down is because women are being liberated and empowered, socially, economically, personally and spiritually. As a whole new generation of women and a few men have come to understand and appreciate sexual freedom and sexual responsibility as a natural and normal fact of life and as the number of women who have become socially and financially independent has increased, the numbers of reported abortions have decreased and will likely continue to decrease as women and now men in statistically important numbers have accepted the responsibilities and learned to go the distance in assuring unwanted pregnancies even in sexually liberated times. From this we might discern that people, given the freedom and the tools to do what is best for them, and society, will at times, without coercion, choose to do just that. One of the bases of excuse for the invasion and US interference in other countries business is that by bringing democracy and modern customs to these places the women there will be liberated and empowered. Though no excuse for invading other countries the premise might be true so long as the modern day Christian Dominionists are kept out.

So we find, when looking into our own programs, and having had legal abortions and laws against abortions is that the very best way to end abortions is to end unwanted pregnancies, of this there is no doubt and no argument against the truth of the fact. Likewise, the best way to lower the number of unwanted pregnancies is to empower women. Women who have the benefit of healthy, secure, free and supportive societies are quite capable of making wise decisions regarding pregnancy and birth. For in a woman’s life, there is perhaps no more consequential act than that of bearing a child and raising it into adulthood. Women who face the abuse and trials of rape, incest, poverty, domestic violence, discrimination and the host of other challenges peculiar to women have reason enough to need a way out of an un-wanted or even impossible pregnancy.

There are also of course, times, places, circumstances and situations when a woman gladly welcomes and even pursues a chance to bring a baby into this world. None of this is new either, there have always been those times when a woman might desire a pregnancy and other times when they do not, the challenge then is that women will have children when they want children and that they will not have children when they don’t want children.

This complex situation, as some might have it, is not about freedom in sexuality, permissiveness or a general decay of morals. We know with just a short glance at human sexual patterns and tendencies that there have been very few people in this world at this or any other time that had sex only for the purpose of having a child. This includes both women and men who most unfortunately, horribly even, are not both held to the same level of responsibility where sex and pregnancies are concerned. Further to the point of a woman’s right to choose pregnancy or not, even after men have dropped the cavalier and irresponsible attitude, even when some level of shared responsibility is desired, there is no possible way for men to equally share in the birth or care of children. Ultimately this is a woman’s issue and men must respect and support this fact with that knowledge always in mind.

Societies have tried in various times or throughout history to restrict a woman’s ultimate decision as to when she might have a child or not and at other times societies left women to this decision as a personal choice. Again, this is nothing new. What may be somewhat new is this push to turn the matter of abortions into a political issue decided along Dominionist Republican lines, and a matter that reaches far beyond the rights of women today but extends, due to other political factors inherent in Dominionist philosophy, into the very question of the fate of the U.S. of A.

The Dominionists insist that it is their Christian duty to stop abortions even to the destruction of the country as we know it. We have seen firsthand the degree to which they will throw off the laws of the constitution and basic ethical agreements, lowering themselves as they make every kind of concession to a man who in his own not-so-cleverly disguised words likens himself to some kind of savior in the form of a dictator. There is no pretending that Donald Trump has not positioned himself as such a person. This positioning of Trump, with the support of the Evangelical Christians is both a blatant attack on the democratic principles of this country and also, at the same time, it is anti-Christ in the general sense of the word as outlined in The Bible. Jesus himself refused to take the world by force, yet Donald Trump and his Dominionist backers have the gall to attempt to do so using the name of Jesus and his Church as a stepping-stone to their all-to-obvious lust for power. This is anti-Christ.

I do not believe these Dominionists and Evangelical Christians as they have already shown us that they have forsaken both their country and their church along with the principals of democracy and the teachings of Jesus. They have shown us that the only plan they have for ending abortions is through the use of force against women by denying them those contraceptive tools that they need in this world to make their decisions honestly and without trauma or duress. They have shown us that they have no regard for our constitution or even our ethical and moral social requirements in their blatant disregard of those pillars of our society. They have lied to us and they have cheated and abused the system that they work to dominate and rearrange according to their own images, just as they have done in the churches that they have come to control.

Gone from their religious doctrine are the words of Christ, gone along with the sympathy, compassion, non-judgement, charity, faith and love that Jesus asked to see from his church. Instead we find this corrupted organization pursuing domination through force and brutality which is found nowhere in Christian doctrine. This we see as these non-believers run to rally around a brutal regime that pounds away at those who seek justice in all its many forms, racial, social, economic or even environmental which were the exact things that were expected of anyone trying to follow Christ and as Jesus made clear, where there is no Christian work, there is no Christian belief.

These Evangelical Christians have made abortion their number one issue rather than making poverty, homelessness, police brutality, racial equity and environmental stewardship the focus of their charity and love, and so, under examination we find that they not only support the oppression of women but the oppression of everyone but themselves under a regime that is particularly cruel and authoritarian, a regime that Trump has said is out to dominate and crush dissent or any ideas of freedom and prosperity for the common man, a regime that bestows its favor exclusively towards the already rich and powerful which was also condemned in the teachings of Jesus Christ and runs contrary to the promise of our nation. Politically, it is much more expedient to their cause to attack abortion with its highly charged emotional and ethical considerations than it is to feed the hungry, house the poor, and to deny the privilege of some men over others.

There is still a remnant of Christians in this country. You will not necessarily find them in the brick and mortar churches of this land which is fine, as it should be, for it was written in the Christian Bible that the church is simply this, it is the body of believers in Jesus Christ and nothing more or less. It was also written that there would be false leaders and corrupted churches and that the believers should come away from churches and leaders such as that. So of course, for those that study and believe the Christian teaching, we have this corruption in the church and an anti-Christ in our midst and the blind leading the blind to their own destruction. The Evangelical Christians and Dominionists in their pride have failed to see any of this and predictably, through corruption and impatience have taken the manifestation of Christs revelation into their own hands, exploiting the terrors of Armageddon while turning away from the Apocalypse and the good news of Jesus Christ.

Ultimately for those who believe in the God of Jesus and in the God of love and in uncorrupted Christian teachings of Jesus, it must never be forgotten, our own tendency towards sinfulness which is nothing more or less than a lack of faith. And likewise for those uncorrupted Christians, we must remember where Gods kingdom is to be found, which is inside our own hearts and minds and it must remember always, by those who believe, by who and what Christians are saved and how this too concludes the grace of God towards all men.

Here we find the mystery of the Christian teachings come to life…

“No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” Jeremiah 31:34