The underlying thesis of "A View From The Pew" deals with the institution's presentation of a god that micro-manages one's life versus a god that allows a person more personal choices, along with personal responsibility. The institution assumes the role of God's representative to the congregation and teaches them on a subject by subject basis to live and manifest their Christianity primarily through their attendance and support of the institution and its selected programs. Those institutions in question promote/emphasize (1) much praying, (2) much congregational praising of God. (3) Manifesting spirituality in their prepared "worship" programs, (4) reliance on God's constant provision for their protection as well as their every need and/or want, (5) and, acceptance of life's disappointments as having been allowed or approved by God. The congregations are admonished to read their Bible, but are taught only selective scripture that supports institutional doctrine. Some of that teaching is purposely taken out of context or misquoted entirely. God is presented only as a one-way street named LOVE. They claim that a true Christian will be an active participant in some local church. They do not want their authority challenged. Sermons have become less and less specific to audiences of a million different imaginary gods. PC's gospel of "No absolutes" has hammered specific Bible teachings into the Christian history book. The thrust of those anemic sermons is to console, without offending. Much of the ongoing ministering to the congregation comes from the group's ignorance of the Bible and how to live an overcoming Christian life. Dysfunctional families are created and sustained as sheep to be tended by the shepherd called the institution. Many institutions have taken that as their primary role. They light the fires of confusion, then chase around in their "Dear Abby" role trying to put them out. It's another form of job protection, perpetuated by use of the "mushroom theory." This book suggests that a "born again" believer and follower of Jesus Christ has been restored to an individual relationship to God the Father, through Jesus. It suggests that that relationship cannot be monitored or censored by men's doctrines or by a controlling institution, which is nefariously representing Christ's Church.

The author addresses sensitive issues emerging from changing Christianity's messages to the world and the resulting influence, not only to Christianity itself, but to western world governments. He maintains that Governments and Christianity have both fallen prey to political manipulation of man's sensitive ego; and the only reason that has happened is because official Institutional Christianity now "coddles" ego to enlarge its membership. He concludes that gaining control of personal "ego" is the primary biblical message to living out Christian standards and traces the decline in western culture and the dismantling of free societies to the abandonment of traditional Christianity.

This is a new release of the original 1935 edition.

The author addresses sensitive issues emerging from changing Christianity's messages to the world and the resulting influence, not only to Christianity itself, but to western world governments. He maintains that Governments and Christianity have both fallen prey to political manipulation of man's sensitive ego; and the only reason that has happened is because official Institutional Christianity now "coddles" ego to enlarge its membership. He concludes that gaining control of personal "ego" is the primary biblical message to living out Christian standards and traces the decline in western culture and the dismantling of free societies to the abandonment of traditional Christianity.

With A Digest Of The Share-Our-Wealth Principles Prepared By Senator Huey Long.

With A Digest Of The Share-Our-Wealth Principles Prepared By Senator Huey Long.

With A Digest Of The Share-Our-Wealth Principles Prepared By Senator Huey Long.

With A Digest Of The Share-Our-Wealth Principles Prepared By Senator Huey Long.

There surely must be a thesis out there that deals with the distinguishing differences that often exist between the Church and its attached Institutions, but I haven't found it. I am attempting to do just that, because I have come to believe that the Church and its accompanying institution are obviously not always the same. Any such critique is probably not wanted by most individual church organizations, particularly as it identifies the institution as sometimes being separate and apart from the church. It would be a challenge to the institutions' historic use of power as well as their livelihood. It would also challenge much of the church's formalized history. Existing institutions, having very different doctrines, each claim to be the anointed leadership of Gods Church. They each independently assume the role of God's official representative and spokesman, although the only thing they may have in common is collection of the tithe. It obviously follows that some institutions represent biblical Christianity and some do not. Even so, they operate identical to other professional organizations that refuse to censor their individual associates, even though that associate may blatantly misrepresent the spirit and integrity of the organization as a whole. One will find every political, social, and moral position contained within the institution of the Christian community. Such diversity makes them appear to stand for everything, yet for nothing. Consequently, Christianity has become more and more difficult to define. The title "A VIEW FROM THE PEW" accurately sets the stage and foundation for this book. It is an expression from a person out of the church's audience who believes he hasobserved a skewed presentation of Christianity for many years. A one way presentation replete with contradictions, with little or no discussion or input from the audience. My conclusion is that the 'Institution of the church' and the real Church are not always the same, yet almost ir