FEELINGS VERSUS KILLER SCRIPTURE

You wouldn't think scripture kills would you.

People who call themselves liberals and conservatives (who are really neither scripturally), argue over feelings versus scripture. They give sermons about it online and elsewhere. It's a hugely important issue not for the reasons given by either side but because both sides have it wrong and their premises stymie the truth and all the good that would otherwise flow throughout the whole of humanity, creation, and Heaven.

All people have both good and bad intentions. All people struggle with what constitutes good versus bad or evil. All people are subject to relating to others what constitutes partial truths.

People who call themselves liberals (in terms of current, mainstream, usage) emphasize feelings. Those who call themselves conservatives in the main emphasize other than feelings — feelings here being emotions of course. This cuts across religious and spiritual issues. The most ardent conservative, Republican, Christian-Zionist, evangelicals as they see themselves and the most ardent conservative, Republican atheists will most often espouse the importance of the letter of things versus the feeling of them. This is the issue of letter versus spirit.

Contrary to conservatives, liberals (religious, spiritual, or atheist), will appeal to feeling and sense-meaning over the letter, as "letter" is conceptualized by conservatives.

The truth is that Jesus conflated letter and spirit. It is here that the people are to come together. It is over this issue and as it ties in with all real Christian concepts that Christianity is truly defined.

The conservatives are flat wrong that feelings are to be cast aside while the letter or word is studied and understood. The truth is that the letter and word are emotion. God is love, so says the very letter. Love is emotion. There can be no understanding of the scripture without this first premise. The scripture without emotion (feeling) is dead.

Jesus appealed for greater feeling. He implored his followers to have greater zeal, flavor, saltiness, enthusiasm, encouragement, etc. He implored them to have certain feelings and not just stronger ones. He made clear that the Pharisees were great proselytizers. They could rev up the emotions of converts making them two times as wicked in behavior as those Pharisaic proselytizers. That wicked behavior comes out of the zeal, the emotions, of those indoctrinated converts.

One will note that those who implore people (would-be Christians today) from the conservative position use great emotional thrust to dissuade others from feelings but only from certain kinds of feelings even while they appeal to having no feelings but rather sticking with the letter. This is pure hypocrisy and up to no good but rather selfishness. These people aren't opposed to emotion or feeling. They are only for selfish feelings in the end.

As mentioned above, the letter versus spirit (feeling, emotion, and the figurative) runs the false-conservative spectrum. You will find it mixed in with otherwise seemingly right doctrine. Many anti-prosperity preachers decry the mundane greed and materialism of prosperity preachers while still holding against emotion as the basis of everything we know about God. (The letter came out from God's emotions. The letter and spirit go together.) At the same time they decry the greed of the prosperity preachers, which greed they feel according to scripture is bad, they just shut off their feelings when the implications of that same scripture requires much more of them than just decrying the prosperity preachers. It requires them to give and share all and to recognize the real law that is the New Commandment over all the mundane, pathetic excuse that is passed off as law. I mean specifically all the so-called laws that are nothing but false-hearted lies such as private property and money and taxes and sovereignty in the coercive sham that is called democracy but where people are not allowed to vote for Jesus as their top community leader, their guiding example. The mundane law intentionally precludes people choosing to live as Jesus says we are to live. It has been this way since the lead-up to Constantine's usurpation of the faith for his violent, worldly Empire building.

For an example of the mixed-bag interpretation, see: "The Independent Conservative site." As you consider that site, consider that what we are saying in this entire article may very well be completely foreign or new to the author of that site, Darnell McGavock. Darnell rightly is adamantly opposed to the prosperity preachers, but he is wrongly adamantly in favor of capitalism, if not laissez faire, and of guns. Those things are inconsistent and antichrist when the full message of Jesus is taken at once rather than piecemeal to justify selfishness that is always error.

To understand from where the most recent anti-prosperity preacher momentum has been coming, see: "Amen to Senator Grassley Serving Notice to Prosperity Preachers," by Carla Thompson. Blogcritics. November 19, 2007.

For one, Senator Grassley is looking into whether or not the preachers have paid their proper personal taxes. Have their ministries and they itemized deductions and taken as business expenses things which are not properly deductible and accounted as such? Are the same standards to be applied to all entertainers and so-called religious personalities?

(See also: "'Church' and state." WORLD Magazine. January 26, 2008.)

We don't hold with taxes at all. However, we definitely do not advocate people not to pay them. Money is an evil invention not of God's doing. On a certain level, money is hardhearted Caesar's and his spiritual forbearers and not God's. The system is evil since it is not unselfishly based. We shouldn't need money or taxes for anything ever. We wouldn't need them except the hardhearted have usurped authority, stealing the rightful inheritance of the Son of God, Jesus Christ, and murdering him rather than giving him his meet in due season. The system will wither and die, thank God.

If Senator Grassley is looking into whether or not the donors may deduct their contributions to these false churches and preachers, he'll have a difficult time drawing the line between acceptable and unacceptable religions. He'll be dealing with the line of free exercise of religion.

The feelings so-called conservatives seek to encourage others to avoid and to avoid seeing clearly and plainly in scripture where such feelings are central include most importantly compassion. They seek to draw attention away from Good Samaritanism, from seeing all as siblings and neighbors, from unity that is the feeling of being one together, and from all that necessarily follows from these express teachings of Jesus Christ.

Now it is extremely evil (albeit often verging upon mostly subconscious) to use Jesus to promote antichrist teachings that say don't feel but only read the letter as the antichrists interpret it to you.

Why do so many people gravitate to this sheer evil teaching by the millions even tens and hundreds of millions verging on billions? Well, that's easy. Given the choice of real Christianity versus false interpretation, they go with the false. It allows them to continue on, being selfish while pretending to be holy.

If they read the scripture correctly, getting out of it the proper emotional condition, they will be faced with a choice they are avoiding. They will be faced with putting themselves in the emotional shoes of everyone else, which is exactly what the Golden Rule is all about.

The Golden Rule requires every Christian proactively to do his or her best and together toward all others, as Jesus did. Being Christlike is to feel toward others as Christ felt and feels. It is to feel God. Remember, God is love. Love is a manifest emotion.

For decades, centuries, and soon to be millennia, people have been polishing the methods of distraction and diversion and deception. They have been building upon the traditional teachings of others all with a conscious and subconscious eye to selfish gain.

Preachers today are constantly passing the plate having it filled by the misguided flock. Those funds should be going to exactly how Jesus used the funds given him. Jesus did not live palatially in the mundane sense. The funds given him provided his disciples with the basics and afforded them the ability to continue spreading the message and work, but after that, it all went to the real needs (not selfish wants) of others.

Where are the people today who feel this way? Where are the brave souls who agree? Where are those who write this also?

I said, "Killer Scripture," in the title. The wrong, dead, interpretation of the letter has led to all the antichrist dogma in the Roman Catholic and Protestant and Eastern and even so-called non-denominational churches. They say Christianity allows for "just" wars. However, no where can anyone show anyone else where Jesus called for humans to make war upon each other ever. Even the parables to which most would point to authorize such wars must be interpreted consistently with all the other parables and words and deeds of Jesus. None may be taken in isolation. When the entirety of his message is digested, no such wars are allowed. There is no such emotion in the heart allowing for such. That is why on the microcosmic scale, Jesus stopped them from stoning the adulteress. If war were ever just, so would stoning be allowable. It is not though. Keeping the largest and smallest and everything between is all required at the same time and always, forever.

It is this teaching that is being suppressed with all the might the evil-hearted can bring to that task. Their greedy hearts hate it. They know that the lion's share of the meal ticket rightly will change hands from the few rich to the many poor.

Out of their ignorance, they hate that idea. They don't believe that all will become rich in the true meaning of the word "rich," the scriptural meaning meant by Jesus and other prophets.

Richness is quality of life. It is quality of being. We live in a fractured world community, fractured down to the microcosmic level. Top-to-bottom, it is fractured, broken up, robbed and deprived of wholeness, wholesomeness, health, and the like. Top-to-bottom, it is built upon the totally evil premise that selfishness is the right rule. It is not. It is the rule that has come out from the spirit, the feeling, the emotional condition, of evil.

There is no love in it, no peace, and no truth.

Real love is the right feeling toward all others that results in all having all real needs met via the complete spirit of cooperation, unselfishness, sharing, compassion, care, siblinghood, neighborliness, Godliness, and on and on. It is out of this feeling that the quality of life in the here and now and elsewhere (everywhere) is impacted eternally.

That's the faith. That's real Christianity. The letter without feelings is dead.

Now what? Now that you've read this, do you just skip away as if nothing is required of you? The right emotional condition is that of coming together to do all that is consistent with what I've just written. It is to not do the greedy, violent, or depraved but their opposites, which include the generous, pacifistic, and the pure

Where will you go to look for the place around which to gather in this spirit? Where else will you find it consistently?

This Church says that being a real liberal is to be giving and sharing, peaceful, and never harmful, including sexually in any way. It says that these are teachings Jesus shares, of course. This Church says that all Christians must come together to do all the things Jesus calls for. The Church is to feed the people, the poor, and do all the other things. Where's the food? Where's the land upon which to live and to grow it? Where may the poor raise their food without harassment from the greedy?

Do what's right. It is right that you should contribute to bringing forth that land. We need donors. We need many donors, just as the greedy preachers have many donors. We need them for a good (unselfish) cause rather than a selfish, deceptive one. We need people to spread this word. Will you help? Will you feel this (have this spirit) or shut down your heart? Where do you stand, with whom? By what fruits will you be known?

Do it now. Help us now. Help shine the light.

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.