I live in
the South. I am a Texan. If George W. Bush can say that, so can I. Like him, I
was not born here. Like him, I am now aligned with this state for as long as I
remain here. More so, on my father’s side of the family, my roots go back to
the Indian Territory (now Oklahoma).
I have ancestors who rode with Quantrill and Bloody Bill Anderson. As such, I am not talking
with disrespect towards the South. I am part of the South. Living in Texas returns the family
line to its historical roots. I respect my southern ancestors, but the war is
over. I am specifically, therefore, addressing one aspect that was designed
specifically to overrun the North, the Union,
dating back to 1845.
Let’s not
get carried away with some spy verses spy conspiracy theories. This is no
conspiracy. This has been in the open playbook for the last 161 years. What is
showing is the exact design and distinction of the Southern Baptist Conference
since its inception.
The last
conversation I had with a "Fundy" (Fundamentalist) was shortly after
my mom's passing (February 10, 2006). I sent her a copy of a rough draft of the
chapter in Radicals, Religion
and Revelation called "Death and Life." I
made the mistake of thinking she was interested (this of course was on the web
and I never met the person). She proceeded to tell me I was "talking out
my ass" because I mentioned, in a general way, “purgatory”.
Thinking
that my memory from CCD may have faded with time, I went to the New
Advent Encyclopedia
and
proceeded to look up “purgatory.”
What I had
said was that loved ones pray the departed’s soul into heaven. It turns out
that it is the Bishops who do the praying at the request of the loved ones, on
behalf of the soul, which passed over. This is Catholic dogma; I consider it
general information. However, if it gives the survivors comfort, so be it. The
same holds true concerning the Mourners Kaddish of the Jewish tradition. The
chapter, however, was about my experience with my mom’s passing. It was not a
deep discussion of dogma. However, the "Fundy" took offense to the
mention of purgatory, and decided to berate me. Now here is the real rub.
I quoted the
first paragraph of the information from the Catholic Encyclopedia, and she
still said I was talking without knowledge. She further berated me for not
knowing the original Greek and Hebrew, and for using quotes from the King James
Bible (as you know I use the AV because it is Royalty Free and I don't have to
be concerned about someone coming after me for violating their copyright).
That does
bring up some interesting challenges:
First, if
the working of God is timeless and universal, why should anyone learn two
archaic languages? One, ancient Greek, is no longer spoken (the Greek of the NT
times is about as close to Greek today as Chaucer is to American English, maybe
even less). The other, Hebrew, was, for the most part, dead until 1948 (Hebrew
today has the same relationship to Hebrew of antiquity -- and I have taken
classes in it. I could speak a little Hebrew at one time, but have forgotten
most of it.) The use of Greek in the NT is more than a little odd; why was
Greek used? Latin was the language of the Roman Empire.
As for the masses in Galatia,
they spoke a variation of the Celtic language. I could understand Aramaic
writing for some of the churches in the Mediterranean,
but not Greek and not to the Galatians.
Second, if
they have a universal God, or a universal understanding of God, how is it that
I have to look into documents that are thousands of years old to see what he is
doing today? It is a dogma of the institutional religions that dictate this. It
is not a dogma that I adhere to. If God is alive, then it would stand to reason
that he is able to reach a person where he is. This is not to say the scriptures
have no value. Their value is knowing what the founders thought and what they
saw within their finite lifetimes.
Third, all
spiritual knowledge is subjective; it is based on the perceptions and
perceptive capability of the individual. Some people are attuned more to the
spiritual, and some are less. Even Paul wrote that we see in a glass (or
mirror) darkly. Not all things we see or perceive on this side of life are
clear.
I freely
admit that even my knowledge about God is subjective. What I have an issue with
is the concept that my knowledge has to conform to the knowledge of everyone
else.
This is a
form of groupthink, and group manipulation, for the sake of an agenda that is
not specifically of God or good. We see that in the history of the SBC/CSA secular
documentation. It has been whitewashed (no pun intended) because the CSA did
not want the northern brothers to know their agenda and come to terms with the
atrocity of the ownership of slaves as property in the U.S.
Members of
the SBC believe that they are sinless because they have Jesus. This is a belief
that cannot be supported in their scriptures. Sinless is to be perfect, and
beyond all human questioning or responsibility to the society as a whole,
Godlike, or equal to God. This feeling of equality with God pretty much
explains the nonsense that has been occurring in the U.S.
since 2001 when the Neo-Conservatives took over the United States of America.
I realize
within this discussion I am comparing apples to oranges, but the since the days
of Falwell's Moral Majority and the acceptance of the Catholic body into the
Right's religious discussions, the CSA has influenced the American Catholic
mindset. Many now share a rabid inability to view questions without becoming
highly belligerent. Usually, I can ignore the belligerence, and not let them
get to me. However, this time was a bit different.
Since I was
still reeling emotionally from having buried my mother, I was not in the mood
for such discussions. Nor was I in the mood to defend my position or myself. I
did send her back the quote on purgatory and the link. That, however, was not
good enough for her. She told me I was being too literal and sent me a couple
of quotes from American Catholic sites. Truth is, she had issues
with the dogma and doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, but I did not think
that deeply into her motivations; she wanted a fight and I gave her one.
I think my
response was something akin to, "I am not interested in the writings of
the Christian Church; as far as I am concerned the Christian Church should be
driven back into the catacombs and graveyards from which it crawled."
My retort
was pure bull, but I gave her what she wanted: a reason to hate me. No one ever
accused me of fighting fair (shades of “Bloody Bill” there). Like I said,
sometimes I can sound like Rev. Robertson (open mouth, figuratively speaking,
and insert foot).
This is,
however, a truth of the conflict that I see coming. I have no issues with
Jesus, or with the concept of a Christ (a spiritual hero who can do in the
spiritual realm what we, trapped for here and now in the physical and temporal
realm, cannot do for ourselves). If nothing else, Jesus has been a friend of
mine for as long as I can remember.
My issue is
that the SBC/CSA is Christianizing the U.S. in such a way that is does not
reflect anything that I have ever seen from Jesus (in the Greek and Hebrew)
included in the authorized Gospels or the Gnostic Gospels.
The CSA/SBC
agenda is the destruction of the Federal Union by means of religion, destroying
the social fabric that brings us together. I think most people are woefully
unaware of the history of the nation, or understand that our history has been
replaced by their myth. Their myth has one purpose. If this was in any arena
other than religion, it would be treason.
The Liberal
Establishment (if there is one), the Northern Elite, and educated leaders
discounted religion back in the early 1960s. Right now it is the blind spot
that prevents our core leadership from seeing what is happening. The threat is
not out there in Islam. It is here in the religious expressions co-opted and
manipulated by the survivors of the CSA.
Future
research may vindicate the SBC (Southern Baptist Convention) and all of their
spin -offs, but I am not so sure. As stated, the SBC was formed in direct
opposition to the abolition movement in the North in the 1845, and became the
primary sanctuary for the surviving CSA leadership after 1865. Since
reconstruction never did address the crimes of the CSA military leadership, and
they were allowed to conspire to preserve as much of their social culture as
they could (within the framework of the Federal Union's Control), they created
a religious expression which sanctified them under the blessing of their God.
They preserved the way of life which they adopted; a way of life that is far
less cultured than what we have come to expect as a progression in our human
understanding (call it evolution, if you wish). The best way to preserve an
ideal is to incorporate it into a religion which cannot be questioned, then
teach it to others. Over time, if unchecked by rational discussion (and
rational discussion is an oxymoron in most religions), it can become a
pervasive cultural dictate. In the post Civil Rights era, we have forgotten
just what the Confederacy was.
It cannot be
overlooked that Rev. Jerry Falwell was a staunch segregationist. I am unsure of his
repentance in this matter. His version of SBC/CSA is
a religion of cast, place, status, wealth, and subservient submission to
economic masters. Paul, himself, warned against this. James speaks specifically
against this. Jesus taught against this; both in the authorized Gospels and the
Gnostic Gospels. Yet, it is the predominant expression of Christianity in the U.S.
today. The neo-conservative Right, in the name of God, strips us of our ability
to resist by creating a substandard service-based economy and inflicts upon us
perpetual impoverishment and subjugation.
It cannot be
a coincidence that the North's manufacturing capability has been all but
destroyed in each successive neo-conservative Right assent to power since 1976.
According to the “Southern Myth” of the CSA/SBC, the South only lost the Civil
War because of the superior manufacturing capability of the North. This is a
myth.
It has been
successfully argued that the South had both the inventive and manufacturing
capability to sustain a four-year war against the Union forces. Remember,
please, the South invented the first warfare submarine (even prior to the H.L.
Hunley), and the first iron clad
warship (the Merrimac or better known as the CSS Virginia).
Even today,
141 years after the war, some seven-and-a-half generations after the Civil War,
it is still referred to by Southerners as The War Between the States and/or The
War of Northern Aggression. While those of us who were not raised in the South tend
to chuckle, and at times smirk, over this distinction, we have to seriously
look at the connotations of those words.
To call that
war a Civil War communicates a rebellion by one side against the other.
To call it The War Between the States carries a connotation of equal
belligerency; it negates the rebellion of the Southern States against the
legally elected government of Washington,
D.C. To call it The
War of Northern Aggression nullifies any responsibility of the South for its
treason. There are people in the South today, who still fly the Stars and Bars
as a sign of rebellion against the Union victory. There are people who question
the validity of the Union’s victory. There are
people who even question the validity of the admission of Texas
into the Union in 1870.
The Civil
War still is being contested in the hearts and minds of many
Southerners. When one studies the Civil War, great attention is given to the
battles fought, but far less is given to the politics and the motivations of
the era. This is so true that contemporary historians have a hard time
understanding why the war occurred. Again, we underestimate the religious
expressions and aspects of the Civil War. As I have come to study causality, I
am beginning to conclude that this war was more about whose view of God was
correct; effectively a religious war. Over 141 years later, that unquestioning
religious fire has not gone out. If nothing else, it gets hotter in the coals. What
I see in history is that the South, by the nature of the Confederate ideal
(individualism), could not succeed in building a nation. They acted much the
same way we see the nation today: Every-Man-for-Himself. This commonly is
called Social Darwinism, and it is ironic that it comes from the soul of those
who oppose the Darwinian teachings of evolution.
It would
take more exploration than I can do here to document all the policy and
political errors of the Confederates, but a simple example of the Confederate’s
ingrained incompetence is Lee's decision to engage the federal forces at
Gettysburg. To make the argument succinct, he was under orders to take
Washington, D.C., not wander the countryside of Pennsylvania (I am being a bit
flippant with that statement, but it is sufficient to say that Lee, as well
loved as he may have been, could not take orders.)
However,
don't think this was just a Confederate issue; I have seen, but cannot
duplicate for you here, computer models of events which have shown that the
North, based as they were on April 12, 1861, could have subdued the Confederate
Rebellion in six months. I suspect that the Federal Government underestimated,
again, the religious motivations of the Gospel of Individualism that was at the
core of the Confederate cause. What happened instead was this:
From April 12, 1861, to April 9, 1865, three million
Americans fought in over 10,000 battles and skirmishes in the north and south
of America.
More than 620,000 soldiers died. Never before, or since, have Americans fought
Americans in formalized war.
If the
religion of the South was tainted before the Civil War, it has gotten worse,
with the adoption of the Second Coming theosophy that came into existence in
the 1830s. While I will not delve into that in depth here, the Rapture
theosophy negates the instructions of Jesus Christ in Matthew 13.
Speaking of
good and evil, Jesus said (presuming one accepts this as legitimate teachings,
and I do - it fits ideas and ideals of other religions and other spiritual expressions):
But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye
root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and
in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the
tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my
barn.
What the
CSA/SBC wants to do is play God and uproot everything because God will rescue
them; that is not the case.
Even if
there is a God, even if the God of the Bible is God, He said he would not destroy
the world to rid it of evil. Moreover, going back to the words of Jefferson, it is not the legitimate goal of our
government.
That is the opinion
that the neo-conservative Right is now dictating as policy for the nation based
on their religious view of the world.
It is a view
that embraces the destruction of anyone that is not submissive to their
religious view. This is not unlike Nazi Germany, and that form of nationalism
led to more than 55 million dead, an untold number of
life-long injuries, and billions of "dollars" in property damage. All
of this under the battle cries of "God is on our side." As the now
famous Nazi belt buckle proclaimed “Gott Mit Uns (God With Us).”
Once again,
we hear it in the neo-conservative Right speeches coming from the SBC in the U.S.
We are heading for a clash of historic proportions and it cannot be ignored.
The Fundamental religion, which has spread via the Southern Baptists, wants to
destroy everyone who they think is spiritually inferior.
Now it is
from God’s hand that they seek the destruction of others. How long will it be
before they grow tired of waiting upon God and decide to unleash some form of
Religion Police upon the people of the United States to detain those who
hold different views?
