It seems, periodically, that I see the televangelist Franklin Graham (and others), proselytizing on TV. Well, that’s his gig, learned from his daddy who was an expert at identifying and expanding upon the emotional needs of the masses. Hey, everybody does his own thing, so I’m okay with that. Back in the day, I enjoyed listening to his dad; that man had a way with words. But I digress. Hearing Mr. Graham this time, I began to ponder the question, “What is he selling?” This is a simple question, I agree, but the answer varies by person. That is, he is selling whatever we’re buying. And we’re all buying something, whether it’s safety, assurance, forgiveness, not being afraid of death, or reassurance of our very being. Yes, it’s all in there. But those are just sidelines; the real prize is that afterlife trip to Heaven. That’s the sell.

Am I oversimplifying? I think not. Have you seen the “Heaven or Not” TV ad? It is well-done and to the point: become a Christian and you go to Heaven. Now, I have no argument with their right to create such ads, but isn’t that approach just a sell job to buy an easy commitment? To me, it’s like saying, “Give our restaurant a five-star rating and you can eat there forever for free.” Would that rating be meaningful? Obviously not. It would be worth no more than telling a child, “I’ll give you a cookie if you’ll say you like me.” If Christianity has nothing more to offer than this, then it begs the issue of having churches, and even the purpose in having the ad at all. I believe they’re selling the wrong product. Christianity is more for this life we are experience now, not whatever lies beyond.

Let me repeat that: Christianity has its strength for this life we live, just this one life. Although there are many areas of disagreement between Christianity and me, Christianity promotes a message of love and charity. Despite that, Christians don’t seem to get the full message, probably because the “Go to Heaven” pitch is what is always out there, and many people stop listening beyond that. Now, that statement may offend Christians, but hear me out on this. The first gospel written was the book of Mark, roughly 40 years or so after Jesus died. If eternal life was Jesus’ message, would not Mark have mentioned it or, more likely, emphasized it? Yet he did not. The message was one of love and charity.

To ensure a more complete view, I would be remiss if I overlooked the newer “He Gets Us” TV ads. What is puzzling (to me) is that this ad campaign goes contrary to the “Heaven or Not” group. This site, somewhat glitzy, focuses on the here and now, which would appear to support my earlier statements, but the message is suspicious to me. This, supposedly, is a multi-billion dollar campaign, sponsored by private organizations, and emphasizes that Jesus’ life was not different from our own, and that his message was in caring for each other. Yet, despite that, several news articles indicate that the sponsors are those who are anti-abortion, anti-gay, and anti-LGBTQ. If so, how do the sponsors promote the ‘love one another’ message, yet practice prejudice themselves? What is the real intent of what appears to be a conflicting message?

Well, I have my ideas on that. From recent statistics, church attendance has been falling for decades, and churches are losing money to maintain their worlds. More participants are needed, it’s that simple. Follow the money and it may lead us directly there, to conservative organizations intent on reinforcing what they believe to be a path that people will follow, even though different from their own beliefs. But why? The fundamental ideas I shared that are supported by Christianity, and the gentle message presented by Jesus, are in no way dependent on being part of any religious framework, no more than a belief that eating bananas is good for you implies the need to be part of a banana appreciation club. Caring for others, sharing with others, and having love for others are all virtues that can stand alone, and do so for millions of persons, both in and out of religious frameworks. Religion becomes overhead. The question becomes, “Is religion’s overhead a value?”

That question may seem irrelevant, but I assure you it will become important in future decades. On the one hand, Christianity is being challenged as irrelevant in today’s world, but on the other hand, that belief could lead to a vacuum in the community outreach exemplified by local churches. Regardless of what one believes, churches have served communities well for hundreds of years. When church attendance falls, and when churches close, the framework of helping each other and promoting shared beliefs in the goodness of people will be lost. That loss could be devastating. When we lose a service is when we discover that there was more there than we understood.

Think on that. Regardless of one’s religious beliefs, the loss of churches within communities could be a signal of a downward trend in community spirit and in support of each other. Organizational charities may still exist, but the personal involvement of churches has no known replacement. People find strength in being able to come together with like-minded citizens on caring for and supporting each other, and in seeking a higher explanation of life. Without churches, there is nothing. Nowhere to go. Are we prepared to live without commonly-shared beliefs? Is there a solution to this? I believe there is. Let me explain.

Although it may seem heretical, Christianity needs to spread its wings and explore how to present its core message without continuing to wrap it in New Testament clothing. Were he alive today, Jesus would not recognize any of what he would see in churches, not the architecture, not the organization, not even the message. Churches, by and large, preach the message of Paul, not that of Jesus. Jesus talked to the people, with ideas on living a better life. Can we not use those words without requiring that they be done with all the added beliefs and protocol and creeds imposed by men?

YES. Yes, we can do that. Doing that, opening the windows of Christianity to the true message will empower the continued expansion of members, and with it, a new appreciation of the original message taught so long ago in Galilee. His message was life, not eternal life. Churches still carry the message of God to fix all of our problems, overcome all our shortcomings, provide happiness in our daily lives, and also tell us that the joy of life is eternal, thereby removing the sting of death. Yes, friends, that is what churches and televangelists are selling, and, for many people, it’s what they’ve been buying. But the message could be so much better; it could be for a balanced life. Churches with new life could deliver that message.

A balanced life requires that we each take ownership of ourselves. This is our one time on the Earth, our one time to define and live a life that honors life itself, a life that others will respect. God, whether you believe that he exists or not, is not part of our daily life, and cannot be a leading force for whatever exists in our short life. We cause irreparable damage to our vision of ourselves when we align ourselves with one whom we believe to be the architect of the universe, with life eternal. Reverting to Jesus’ initial words will carve a cleaner path. That is the message for a new revival.

Heresy? Sacrilege? No, nothing of the sort. Words such as heresy were created to cast a protective layer on religion to prevent active discussion, the very dialogue that is needed to internalize and accept our beliefs.

So, are churches, Mr. Graham and other televangelists wrong in the message they deliver? No, there are tens of thousands (millions, really) who warmly accept their message—and who am I to be right? We share a similar goal: we share a vision of a direction in life to bring inner peace, their approach being to trust that responsibility to a higher power, and my approach being to find the strength within ourselves, the message that Jesus taught.

Unfortunately, beliefs in this topic are so ingrained in our society that a real discussion is virtually impossible. Will churches change? Will they eventually lose all relevance? What I believe was developed alone, and might have been different, had this been an open issue. But it is not. To many, the entire subject is irrelevant. To others, it is life itself. Find the answer for you.