What Does The Pledge of Allegiance and Flag Salute Really Say? What Does Any Country Ask For But loyalty?
What Does The Pledge of Allegiance and Flag Salute Really Say? What Does Any Country Ask For But loyalty?
This issue, while seemingly insignificant, determines the life of an adherent to the Watchtower Society and even determines cases of death and imprisonment under governments that have laws as such. To lose one's family, friends and even face imprisonment and death over such an issue is to forfeit life for belief, a belief that results from legalistic impositions which result from faulty foundations.Is the "pledge of allegiance" and flag salute of a religious nature ? Does participating in these actions constitute a compromise of Christian integrity ? Should persons sacrifice their lives for their refusal in participation on this issue?
Anotherwards, "I vow to be loyal to the symbol of the country and to the Republic for which this flag stands - one nation and it's allies under God, united in purpose, unable to divide, with liberty and justice for all." The person who cites this allegiance vows to be loyal to his country, provided the country fulfills it's vow to supply "justice and liberty to all." Recently the phrase "one nation under God," has come under attack and a petition has been signed to remove this.
This vow or promise has been broken many times over the past two centuries and is continuing today. There has been a civil war, inner divisions, wars, corruption, greed and a lack of justice and liberty for all on a large scale basis. Just think, if these were not the facts and the vow of the countries side of the issue was truly obeyed, with "justice and liberty for all," this would be a nation under God.
According to the fundamentalists, and convoluted reasoning of Christian theology, the entire earth is under Satan's system, "the god of this system of things" and all humans and countries are in "spiritual warfare," with none being able to accurately promise and deliver true justice and liberty for all. These are from the words of Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, not God. There is a vast difference there. Either one can take the stand of the Fundamenalist Right, actively engaging in politics, with hardline moral codes that are one-sided legal precepts from literal renderings, thinking they are bringing God's Kingdom to earth. Or one can take the extremist view of the Watchtower, to sit idle and wait for God's Kingdom to strike on it's own out from heaven, destroying all except those in their faith. Both views are self serving, futile attempts at dealing with and facing life. They both hide in neurotic mindsets of limited courage and ability to face naked reality for what it is.
Literalized scriptures that preach eschatology of current events and rely on God's Kingdom to arrive as an external cure-all with justice and liberty for all are illusionary, for what is the kingdom but of transformed humanity? A humanity that transcends all national borders and divisional boundaries. Culture remains, distinctions remain, divisive prejudices do not. This is the Kingdom of God. Despite, all the wars, suicide bombing attacks, totalitarian government mentality guised under democracy, man's nature is still evolving to higher consciousness, apparently with many setbacks. Either this world will continue to evolve and grow in the returning direction towards the Source, or it will destroy itself. Time will tell. Either way, time is eternal and life never ending. (2 Cor 4:4; Eph 6:12; Matt 6:10; Dan 2:44)
Idolatry ?
Can pledging allegiance to a countries flag constitute as an act of idolatry and image worship ? Consider the case of Daniel and his three companions, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, this being the account used by the fundamentalist Watchtower who enforces as law. After taking on the names Belchazzar, Shadrack, Meshack and Abednego, named after Pagan Babylonian (so-called false) Gods, they then took active positions in the political government of Babylon. None of this came as integrity issues to the God of the Jews, Yahweh - Jehovah. (Dan 1:1-7; 2:48-49)
Only after King Nebechanezzar constructed a large golden idol, representing one of the many Babylonian gods, did an issue of integrity to God of the Jews, Yahweh, arise. All those who resided in Babylon, including all of the Jewish exiles, were to bow down and perform an act of worship to this statue, acknowledging this idol as a god to be worshipped. When Shadrack, Meshack and Abednego refused, they received the punishment of being put in a fiery furnace to die. Then came the imaginary story of 3 men and an angel that lived within the fire, all within the theistic framework of a bygone era, far removed from modern logic, science and even intuitive thinking. (Dan 3:1-30)
Can this account be compared to pledging allegiance to a flag or the symbol of a country and what the country stands for , liberty and justice for all ? In the account of Daniel, the golden statue was an act of worship, the type of worship that only belongs to the jealous God, that of the Judeo-Christian culture. A God created in the image of man, in this instance, the image of the Hebrews and subsequent Christian culture. However, in the flag salute, it is not religious worship, but a vow of loyalty to liberty and justice for all. Of course even this, is a farce and only a pretense, for what nation has ever provided this?
Showing loyalty to a country using an image is far different from worshipping it. Anyone can take the flag and other objects and either show respect for it or worship it, the choice being theirs. The same can be true with any object, person, place or thing. They can be respected, valued and admired or they can be worshipped, the choice totally depending on the individual, not to be subject to a restrictive, judgmental, blanket condemnation, from some self appointed slave class, or religious organization, such as the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. If I worship the words of men and call it holy scripture, is that not idolatry? If I pray to God as an object, as a person, as an external being apart from my inner nature, a God that separates myself from one tribe to another, is that not idolatry? The line can only be drawn with love, love free from possession and objectification, free from restriction and conditions placed on respect and loyalty.
Under the "pledge of allegiance," if the country were to ask a person to engage in actions that are contrary to "liberty and justice for all," then they are breaking their part of the vow. This they do all the time. What nation doesn't? They all serve their own means, claim to be selfless, when in turn they are self serving. Otherwise there would be no national boundaries.
Worship can be both an act of reverence, whether paid to man, such as bowing when a judge or court official enters into a room, (see chap. Matt. 18:26) or to God (see chap. Matt. 4:10) Idolatry is objectification. Anything more than existence itself in terms of servitude is idolatry. Who can place restrictions on such? Idols, flags, scriptures, Gods, organizations, slave classes, images, practices, teachings, rituals, husbands, wives, activities & etc.
To enforce legalistic ruling judgments, intolerant blanket condemnations, putting a person's life in danger for their refusal of saluting a flag or singing the national anthem, as their religious organization enforces upon them, is to "go beyond the things written," enslaving men to man made rules and regulations that put a "heavy yoke" on their shoulders with death dealing laws. Legalism such as this has literally caused countless numbers of unnecessary deaths, where families are destroyed and broken up, all for the sake of following the legalistic sacrifices of a man's religious organizational policies, not Gods. How could one say that a religion that enforces this is not a cult? This is not bitterness. This is love. Become aware and find love free from bondage. Free to be loyal, free to love, free to grow autonomously, apart from security.
No Part of This World
Apostle John (the Johannine school of thought) writes, "be no part of the world." Not to be "taken out of the world" but to be no part of it. Why were they to be no part of it ? Because those in "the way" were "chosen out of the world" as people to transform themselves in unity in imitation of the Christ. Was this a religion that would separate itself from one another as the Jews had done to the Samaritans and Gentiles? Was this to divide with barriers against all political, economic and social involvement in the present world? This is the fundamental reasoning, the black and white mentality that leads to prejudice, hatred and war, to exclusiveness and narrow minded bigotry of self righteousness. To be no part of this world is just the opposite, for it is unity, love, to live and be. It is to live without boundaries, love beyond prejudices, to exist as one self apart from false pretenses. Can the Jew love the Samaritan? Can the Muslim love the Jew? Can the straight love (and accept as is) the gay? Can the gay love the straight? The Black love the White, the White love the Indian? The Christian accept the Non-Christian as holy? When these obstructive walls are broken, one leaves the world of separateness and removes oneself from ego-driven competition that creates barriers of division. (John 17:11, 14-19)
National boundaries, social, sexual, economic prejudices of the world are precisely what the context of Apostle James words are about in chapter 4, "A friend of the world is an enemy of God, stating that there are many "arguments and fights," coming from the selfish desires of persons, while many "pray but do not receive" what they ask for because they are asking for only their own self pursuits. But in reality they do not love themselves and therefore cannot love others. If those in James day, loved themselves and catered to their self love, they would love others, but being taught as "sinners," they could not love themselves, in need of a savior, in turn they could not love others. They had the fundamental doctrines - so they thought- and just as the Jews, separated themselves from all those outside of their vacuum. They were "friends of the world," in pursuit of self righteous living to fill the void in their self worthlessness by hurting others. What is the world today, but pursuit of false security to fill the void?
To apply verse 4 of James, along with words of the Gospels, that of being "no part of the world," as not celebrating various holidays, not saluting the flag and blanket restrictions against all political, economic and social involvement is to put legalistic external meanings on scripture, taking them out of their context (they all do this!) as the Watchtower Society does. Their separateness in self servatude, disguised as self sacrifice, makes them friends of the world. Their attempt to remove themselves from the world, puts them directly in the center. It is only those who transcend religious, social boundaries, those who can maintain their different cultural attributes but unify in acceptance of other belief systems of conflicting doctrinal beliefs, or that is the non acceptance of separation into a planetary culture on oneness, transforming perceptions of non-abusive modes of life apart from the divisive world of prejudices. (James 4:1-10; Matt 25:45-47; Phil 2:1-4; Col 3:13-15; Gal 6:10)
Apostle Paul wrote "not to use the world to the full." What does this mean? Wearing head coverings? Restrictions on women? Condemning all homosexuality? Separating ourselves in a vacuum of interpretive belief systems that alienate one tribe from another? This is the man who also encouraged the continuation of slavery. His only solution was to make it a kinder and gentler version of slavery. Judaism was well respected in Rome as an ancient religion of tradition and any rebellion against Rome's institutions would change this favored status, which is precisely what was happening with certain Jewish zealots revolting. He ruled all opposition to government as that of opposition to God, something that great men, such as George Washington and Martin Luther King, Jr. completely failed to adhere to, making this world a much more civil and better place. Patrick Henry's cry of "Give me liberty or give me death, would surely be condemned as "opposition against God," according to the one-sided Pauline concept of human government and Christian involvement, which at that time was not even a new religion, but another movement within Judaism. Antiquated concepts of theistic framework do not solve modern day reality and bring love into the world. Nor do the literal and misinterpreted renderings of fundamentals bring any solution or truth to outdated mentality.
Apostle John confirms, being "no part of the world" is not to love the "things in the world," and the showy display of them ahead of the consideration of others. What is competition but that of separateness of one another. "Only Christians will be saved," or "only Muslims will be saved," or only Hindus will be saved." These are divisions based on showy displays of self-righteousness, of religious zeal, of smug satisfaction, or sheer ignorance for that matter, that of correct doctrine, nothing short of the opposite of love, that is, the things of the world and the showy display of possession. (1 John 2:15-17; Romans 13:1-7; 1 Cor 7:31; Rom 14:5)
Definitions
pledge / n. a formal promise, oath to do s.t.: He signed a pledge to stop drinking. -v. pledged, pledging, pledges to promise, vow formally to do s.t.: I pledge allegiance to the
flag of the United States of America.al·le·giance / n. [C;U] loyalty, strong feeling for a country, leader, political cause: School children say the Pledge of Allegiance to the US flag every morning.
loy·al·ty / n. [C;U] -ties faithfulness, devotion, (syn.) allegiance: The loyalty of dogs to their owners is well-known.
de·vo·tion / n. [U] 1 dedication, loyalty: The soldier won praise for his devotion to duty. 2 loving attention: She is full of devotion to her family.
in·di·vis·i·ble / adj. not able to be forced apart, solid, unified: That family is indivisible; they stay together even during troubled times.
i·dol·a·try / n. [U] the worship of idols: Idolatry was practiced in ancient civilizations by making offerings to the gods the idols represented. -adj. idolatrous.
wor-ship - proskuneo / n / v"to make obeisance, do reverence to" (from pros, "towards," and kuneo, "to kiss"), is the most frequent word rendered "to worship." It is used of an act of homage or reverence (a) to God, e.g., Matt. 4:10; John 4:21-24; 1 Cor. 14:25; Rev. 4:10; 5:14; 7:11; 11:16; 19:10 (2nd part); 22:9; (b) to Christ, e.g., Matt. 2:2,8,11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 20:20; 28:9,17; John 9:38; Heb. 1:6, in a quotation from the Sept. of Deut. 32:43, referring to Christ's Second Advent; (c) to a man, Matt. 18:26; (d) to the Dragon, by men, Rev. 13:4; (e) to the Beast, his human instrument, Rev. 13:4,8,12; 14:9,11; (f) the image of the Beast, Rev. 13:15; 14:11; 16:2; (g) to demons, Rev. 9:20; (h) to idols, Acts 7:43. Note: As to Matt. 18:26, this is mentioned as follows, in the "List of readings and renderings preferred by the American Committee" (see RV Classes of Passages, IV): "At the word 'worship' in Matt. 2:2, etc., add the marginal note 'The Greek word denotes an act of reverence, whether paid to man (see chap. Matt. 18:26) or to God (see chap. Matt. 4:10)'." The Note to John 9:38 in the American Standard Version in this connection is most unsound; it implies that Christ was a creature. J. N. Darby renders the verb "do homage" [see the Revised Preface to the Second Edition (1871) of his New Translation].
1998 Lightbearer