Listen to this post NOW on Beyond Everything Radio!

I make statements on my podcast that at first seem controversial. I say them because the scripture said them first and they bear repeating. The “religions” of the world react because each has a “talk track” for its propaganda, just as we see everyday in the religion of our modern media. My mission with this content is to help free people from their over-identification with religion or institutional power, because that was the mission of Jesus and the community that followed him. Of course religion has long since moved back onto the throne within the hearts of men and women. So I thought we could deconstruct church history and go back to where it all started. This will allow you can determine for yourself if statements like: “Jesus did not start an alternative religion.” are controversial or transformative.

First of very brief survey of religion through the lens of scripture.

Religion has and will co-exist with humanity. We are each created with the capacity (and need) to worship. All people on earth have some form of “appeasement” of their gods. Even in the earliest Biblical narrative, both Cain and Able made offerings to God (Genesis 4:3-4). The biblical account in the Hebrew scripture tells the story of humanity’s relationship with the “One True God” who spoke to the people with signs and wonders, through prophets and leaders (like Moses), and gave them the law and a way to live in fidelity to their God and the rest of the created world. The Old Testament is the generational story of how this “Living God” interacts with humanity, dwelling with them, and how the religion is a framework through which the heart of humanity is exposed and reshaped by God’s enduring love and law.

Of course religion is coopted by the corruption within the human heart which constantly strays from this living God and does evil which oppresses others and brings ruin to oneself. This Living God awakens individuals along the way and calls people back to fidelity to God over and over again. Back and forth this theme goes…close and far… faithful and corrupt…societal decline and restoration…

When Jesus appears on the scene, his ministry is completely subversive to organized religion and he does so from within the Synagogues (Luke 4:15). He even reads the scripture out of sync (Luke 4:17), makes some very controversial statements (v.21) which cause the religious mind to be filled with wrath against him (v.28). Nearly every story, miracle, and message of Jesus is a subversive deconstruction of religion to bring people back to God despite the religious framework. The Good News of the kingdom is the invitation out from institutional overreach unto personal and collective freedom. The scandal of the Gospel (Good News) is that Jesus reveals God to be fully inclusive to all comers, not just those who subscribe to a particular religion…let this sink in. Those who oppose Jesus the most are those who are over-identified with religion or State.

Jesus message is as radical today as it was then. Institutional power is still threatened by it.

So if Jesus’ work and message was to deconstruct religion as the way to God, offering himself as the way, inviting people out of religion into Christ following, then how did we end up with religions which claim Jesus is their founder?

The Catholic Church claims the disciple/apostle Peter was made to be the first Pope and lays claim that the church is founded by Jesus and built on Peter (Petros) the rock (petra) in Matthew 16:13-20. Protestants disagree and say that the church was built upon Peter’s “confession” of Christ, not Peter himself, and that no papal order is ever established despite its efforts to trace it back.

This podcast is all about bringing modern people into the discussion, not by retelling religion’s version of the text, but by letting the Spirit beyond and through the text retell itself, as Jesus would do, apart from the light pollution of institutional religion. After all, Christianity as a religion did not exist when this took place, so how in the world could the text be advocating for either the Catholic or the Protestant version? To help you do this, I follow the hermeneutical (interpretive) process by first reading things in their historical and then thematic context. Once understood, we can make a reasonable application to our modern framework, this is known as contextualization. We’re going to review where it started:

“Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ.” (Matthew 16:13-20)

Contextually, Jesus is nearing the end of his ministry and the institutions of Religion and State are conspiring to cancel him and put him to death. Jesus just warned his disciples about the hypocrisy of religion (Matthew 16:5-12). In Mark 8:15 the text adds “and Herod” which is symbolic of the hypocrisy of the State. If Jesus wanted to create an alternative religion or ignite a political upheaval, why would he warn his beloved of these evils? How does modern Evangelicalism with its embracing of political and religious ideologies compare to Jesus and his disciples in this text?

The first big question: “Who do the people say that I am?

Identity is important. Seems like our whole world is consumed with identity…of course this is because most people do not know themselves and live under a mask “upo-kryto” (hypocritical teaching-v.12). Jesus question is ontological (about one’s being, true identity). This is ground zero for our spiritual journey just as it was for the disciples, and this is where the True church begins, but not as religion spins it.

The disciples answer Jesus’ question in way which indicates that the world at large has a general idea that Jesus was a spiritual leader or prophetic person, but their proximity is clearly distant. If we asked our modern world this question, about 65% of Americans would say they are Christians and of that group only about 1 in 5 would say Jesus was the Messiah. Half would say Jesus is the son of God. This tells me that not much has changed in this regard. The world at large may believe in part, but the proximity is still distant. This means traditional religion, which is in decline, has not been that helpful in bringing people to God. Jesus never invited anyone to religion, but freed them from the burden of religion and institutional overreach by inviting all strata of people to simply “Follow me.“

The second big question: “Who do you say that I am?”

Now the question gets personal. As is should. All good ministries bring their constituents to this question. What about you? What we believe about Jesus sets the course of our spiritual discovery. If he’s just a spiritual man from history, then we never look closer nor get closer. Spiritual liberation stops and we adopt the hypocrisy (the name tag given to us) of religion and State in whatever form pleases us the most. If we believe Jesus is a prophet but we ignore what he says, then we are foolish or don’t actually believe he’s a prophet speaking for God. What we believe “ABOUT” him matters and that is what religion is all about, but what Peter’s confession reveals is not “belief about,” but “faith IN.“

Peter’s confession isn’t self generated. This kind of faith doesn’t come from the outside in by looking at the facts, “flesh and blood” have not revealed it. This kind of “faith in” comes from inside, from that “something more” we can all perceive, or our Father in Heaven as Jesus put it. Faith is experiential unlike belief which is an attestation. Peter has seen the miracles. He has walked on water, fed thousands, and slept under the stars with Jesus. His faith comes from experiencing life with the Son of God, not from religion.

Religion gives us “belief about” but we must graduate that framework and discover “faith in.”

There is so much more contained in this verse which we will explore next week, but for now I’ll leave you with these two ontological questions. The first is a general consensus question of who Jesus is. The second is the personal one of who Jesus is to you. The only question that frees us from the leaven of the first question…the watershed question that Jesus asked each and every one of us:

Who do YOU say that I am?

Our answer to that question sets the course for the rest of our lives.