As of this writing, Jefferson Bethke, aka "bball1989" on YouTube, aka "The Love Jesus/Hate Religion" Guy, has received well over nine million hits on his viral video, Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus. If somehow you haven't seen it, here it is:
Following close behind this video are the memes, which have spread throughout the Internet, with witty phrases on them like "What if I told you Hitler came to abolish Nazis?" and "Hates Fruit, Loves Apples." It's true, of course: trying to separate Jesus from religion is like trying to separate apples from fruits or, as I'm about to discuss, separating birthdays from celebrating the moment you came out of your mother's womb.
Jefferson claims Jesus "came to abolish religion" but then proceeds to endorse everything the Christian religion upholds: "Now let me clarify, I love the church, I love the Bible, and yes I believe in sin." He emphasizes how Jesus "took the crown of thorns, and the blood dripped down his face." Jesus "took what we all deserved." When Jesus "was dangling on that cross... he absorbed all of your sin." So what has Jefferson taken away from Christianity that makes it no longer a religion? Seems like all the essentials are still there: holy book, the church, sin (which implies damnation, hell, and all the terrible judgments Jesus is supposed to save us from by "dangling").
Jefferson might as well say he hates birthdays, but loves celebrating the day he was expelled from his mother's womb. "Now let me clarify," he'd say, "I love presents, I love parties, and yes I believe in cake." But of course he would oppose birthdays.
That's bad enough, but it gets worse when Jefferson makes a less-than-subtle shift in his spoken word poem by first talking about Jesus in contrast to religion, then exchanging "Jesus" for the word "Christianity." By the end of the poem, he wants his listeners to accept not only that Jesus is separate from and contrary to religion, but Christianity is as well.
Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Scientology, Judaism, Jainism, Sikhism, Din-i-Ilahi, Mithraism, Taoism, Shinto, et al are religions, but Christianity isn't a religion. Yeah, that seems reasonable.
It's the old "It's not a religion, it's a relationship" shenanigans, except now Jefferson has given it a makeover. It's still a vain attempt to divorce Christianity from it's brutal and bloody past, in spite of how edgy and artsy bball1989 makes it appear.
 Holla at ya boy |
Make no mistake, I know where this guy's coming from, and I can sympathize. For him, Jesus is real, and he is in a relationship. His life isn't about rituals or empty practices. He and Jesus are pals. Problem is, his "relationship" with Jesus is the same as every other religion, whether he calls it "religion" or not: it's based on faith. Now, as Clayton so eloquently put it, "controlling definitions means controlling the debate," and even though Clayton's definitions of "faith" and "religion" are woefully incomplete and/or inaccurate (I'll address that in future blog entries), he's entirely correct: how we define words - the definitions of words we enforce - determine the course of the debate. If you can sway the crowd toward your definition of a word, you control the debate. This is why I've said for years now that people argue words when they should argue meanings. People fight over statements and when they should be wrestling with the propositions behind those statements.
Consider the word "religion": Jefferson defines it as a practice of empty rituals, self-righteousness, "man seeking god" (ineffectively), hypocrisy, a fruitless attempt to do good and be good. At least, that's his connotative definition, and for him that's all that matters. While I may actually agree with him on this point, and while I question how a person can say - historically speaking - that Christianity doesn't fall under that rubric, I must protest that Jefferson is attempting to control the debate by limiting his definition of "religion" to this particular connotative meaning. Denotatively, Christianity is just as much a religion as Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, or Jediism.
What interests me the most is how much Jefferson Bethke and I agree about religion. In fact, to borrow a technique from another man named "Jefferson" - Thomas Jefferson - I'd like to offer my Jeffersonian version of bball1989's spoken word poem:
What if I told you voting republican really wasn't his mission
What if I told you republican doesn't automatically mean Christian
And just because you call some people blind doesn't automatically give you vision
I mean if religion is so great, why has it started so many wars
Why does it build huge churches, but fails to feed the poor
Tells single moms God doesn't love them if they've ever had a divorce
Religion might preach grace, but another thing they practice
They can't fix their problems, and so they just mask it
Not realizing religion's like spraying perfume on a casket
See the problem with religion, is it never gets to the core
It's just behavior modification, like a long list of chores
Like let's dress up the outside make look nice and neat
But it's funny that's what they use to do to mummies while the corpse rots underneath
Fools, don't you see so much better than just following some rules
Now back to the point, one thing is vital to mention
Religion's a man made invention, the infection
See because religion says do
Religion says slave
Religion puts you in bondage
Religion makes you blind
So for religion, no I hate it
In fact I literally resent it
