Yesterday I mentioned the primer, “Community: Your Pathway to Progress” and I gave you a small preamble (thanks, John Immel) to my examination and criticism of this gem of Christianity-as-channeling-Karl Marx, which essentially preaches the gospel of collectivism both forthrightly and with child-like giddiness. Today I will begin my formal critique of said primer, offering my thoughts as to the underlying metaphysical and epistemological contradictions, deceptions, and outright lies which form the offensive thrust of the nefarious objective: to control individuals for the purpose of acquiring power. Which is really nothing more than the right to destroy anyone and anything in the interest of pursuing an entirely false, irrational, and impossible standard of “truth” and “morality”. A utopia which, being wholly without reason and demanding the wholesale removal of LIFE in order to be realized, is actually nothing at all.
However, before I do that I would like to comment on a little remark by someone down in North Carolina this week as we were discussing the collectivist particulars of a certain paragraph in “Community”. She said, “I don’t care about that.” And went on to explain that if she finds the doctrine at her church odious or irrational she simply ignores it, and goes about the business of church presumably as if nothing disagreeable were really taught from the pulpit at all.
My opinion is that this is a very dangerous approach to church at worst, and renders the “church-going experience” utterly irrelevant at best. If you find yourself in disagreement with the doctrinal ideology of the church “body”, why on earth remain? You are setting yourself up for inevitable failure in more ways than one by tacitly affirming the beliefs by your participation and yet functionally rejecting them. Believe me, the “church” makes it a point to discover those who approach the doctrine this way. They do not consider such members friends, nor people to be trusted with any modicum of responsibility. They may suffer your presence while the tithing remains consistent and/or you aren’t causing any problems (that is, challenging their “authority”), but you will never experience the kind of spiritual growth, friendship, and support one would presume is the only real benefit of such a collaboration.
But even if they don’t find out…and even if you don’t care that they will never consider you a fit nor moral servant of Christ, and one whose salvation is likely dubious at best, you will still do more damage to your life and your family than benefit.
You may acquire some friends, even some who are doctrinally like-minded as you and reject the theological interpretations of the “elders”, and you may experience some tangible benefits such as a place to harbor your kids for an hour and a half every week or some valuable home-schooling connections or a golfing buddy or two. But these benefits will only come at the cost of how you define reality. That is, they will occur only in spite of who you really are. And that is no kind of life. I submit that there can be no true friendships, no truly edifying experiences or tangible benefits which come from mixing mutually exclusive assumptions about the worth of your life. Your social life and your spiritual live with be a farce…a mere illusion of what you really think is going on. Attending a church wherein the leadership presumes that you are not really yourself, and therefore have no value as an individual human being, and thus have no right by metaphysical definition to your own body or property can only end one way, sooner or later: disaster.
And the irony is that the person of which I speak once attended Sovereign Grace Ministries for many years, and left only relatively recently amongst the morbid and fetid chaos, hypocrisy, and abuse. And having been a fifteen-year member of Sovereign Grace Ministries myself I can say this: Doing what this person is doing…the willingness to sweep the doctrinal disagreements under the rug did absolutely nothing to benefit that institution, its pastors, or laity. It merely prolonged the suffering and human destruction, and promoted the full-on illusion for years and years past the point where it stopped being fun.
In short, if the church you are attending does not have a working definition of YOU, it means that they cannot possibly have a working definition of God. So what exactly are you expecting to get out of it? If you say relationships, I say they are based on lie. If you say tangible benefits, I say they cost your soul. You must continue to deceive both yourself and all with whom you share the sanctuary every Sunday morning, not to mention your children, who are presented, at best, with the strange and irrational and confusing dichotomy of a mommy and daddy who tell them not to believe the doctrines they are taught, and yet continue to willfully place them in classrooms with teachers who possess many kinds of authority, spiritual and educational and corporeal, who teach those very doctrines as being from God. Think twice about “not caring” about the forcing of collectivist ideology down the throats of unsuspecting Christians, as rankly observed in this little primer I have next to me in this chair. It will inevitably return to reap anguish upon your head, just as it has in the past.
Even now I could say to this person that we will never be close friends. Because I utterly reject the metaphysical premises you either explicitly or implicitly concede by assuming that the church you are attending is just a fine place to hear about God and Man. It isn’t a matter of getting along. It is a matter of being able to define just who it is that we are supposed to be getting along with, and in the interest of just what we are supposed to define as God. I cannot get along with someone who does not concede that they actually matter. Because that person cannot by logical extension assume that I matter. And if neither of us matter according to this person’s metaphysical assumptions, then there is no point in being friends because there is no friendship, period. For friendship is moot. Friendship based on absolute existential meaninglessness is not a friendship by definition. And this is why, as much as it pains me to say it, I simply cannot stand being around Christians anymore…well, certain kinds of Christians. Those who have to pray every meal and those who never miss church and those who have daily “devotionals” and those who evangelize their faith to the checkout girl or the waiter and have fish on their cars. I just can’t do it anymore, because those are the people who always tow the reformed doctrinal line. And my root metaphysic according to these church-going Christians is that I am a piece of shit. And I refuse to associate myself with people who think that my absolute essence as a human being is shit. And who think that they are shit, too. We are all a big collective of shit going to hell “but for the grace of God” and the kindly ecclesiastical taskmasters He gives us to prod our blind asses along the narrow road.
“This study has been designed as an introduction to community. As such, the focus of the first part of the study will be on getting to know everyone in the group. Then you’ll spend some time discussing the importance of community itself.” (p.9)
So goes the first paragraph. Sounds nice, right? Benign. Gentle. Innocuous at worst. Sure, everyone gets to know each other. That’s nice. Everyone matters. Everyone is special. Everyone is important.
Uh…but wait. Are they? This paragraph…indeed, the entire primer never mentions anything about the importance of the individual to the group. Never mentions the fact that “group” is really nothing but a concept; a figment of man’s impressive imagination, but not actually existing…and thus, requiring the life of the single human being in order to possess any relevancy at all as a concept.
According to this introductory paragraph, the only thing with any explicit or implicit importance is “the community itself.” In this short blurb the individual–the only thing which actually exists at all in this entire opening salvo–has been subordinated to the community, which exists as a SELF of its own. You see, YOU are only important within the context of the group; and by this they mean…well, what kind of important do they mean?
Right. Spiritually important. Which means important to whom? To God. Which means that spiritually important is the only relevant kind of important. And since this is a direct function of the group, God can only see the group, never YOU, individually. For God is a rational God, you understand. He wastes no time on the pointless–on the functionally non-existent–when He has the group by which is Will and Desire is rendered upon the Earth.
This is merely the initial introduction…the tip of the spear of the group metaphysic I mentioned in part one of this article. You do not exist. Only the group exists. You alone are nothing. Thus, you must sacrifice (murder, destroy, erase, consider infinite nothingness) your SELF and relinquish the sum and substance of your body, mind, and possessions to the collective, which, as I explained in part one, is really the relinquishing of all these things to they who claim the right to rule the group by divine mandate, as the chosen representatives of the Primary Consciousness. For you protestant Christians, particularly my reformed friends, this means that your pastor or pastors are God as far as you are concerned. They are the bridge between your metaphysical depravity and God’s metaphysical perfection, which would normally be mutually exclusive. Without them declaring the standard of truth which is also the moral ideal, to which ALL humanity must integrate itself (the root premise of the group metaphysic), you would be lost forever. Adrift in a sea of absolute evil.
Still not convinced, huh? Still think I’m taking this way too seriously? Still think I should approach this primer like the person in North Carolina and simply care less? Take a break? Get a job? Got too much time on my hands? It’s all just a mystery anyway so let go and let God; for to be concerned with such things is for the lofty professor, and patriarchs of philosophy’s past who argued over such things and yet never arrived at anything other than paradox, and the ivory tower intellectual who gets paid to write about things that have so little relevance to rote humans living out their boring little lives…articles by the score which almost never see the light of day by any but a very few and very strange people with serious affect problems and no social acumen? Still think this is little more than hyperbole?
We shall see.
Stay tuned for part three.