I’m afraid of dying,
and because I don’t know where I’m going,
I give tithes to an evangelical church—
that covenants with me—
that I won’t burn,
if I pay my own way—to get into heaven.

I’m afraid of dying,
and because I don’t know when I’m going,
I give premiums to an insurance company
that promises to me—
that my children’s lives won’t become hell,
if I pay their way, too.

And because I don’t know when I’m dying,
I also don’t know
if these capitalist monopolies
will fulfill their contracts,
because it seems to me—
they’re banking on me not knowing.

I’m afraid of dying,
and in my search for peace of mind,
I trade my time for subtle reassurances,
with those who would profit from my misfortune,
trying to exchange my dread for salvation—
while doubt still lingers near.

I’m afraid of dying,
and yet I wonder if my life
is meant for more than this futile pursuit—
dancing with shadows in the noon of day.
But what if, in this fragile existence,
I just acknowledged my Savior’s Grace?

While I ponder, why I’m afraid,
I sink into the depths of despair—
and find lying there, a quiet resolve—
an acceptance of life’s purposes and flow;
a chance to find rest in the fleeting moments,
while recognizing—eventually I’ll have to let go.

Edited by: ElRoyPoet, 2024

Poem Analysis: Capitalism, Faith, and the Human Condition

In the poem the speaker grapples with existential fears surrounding death and the uncertainty that accompanies it. This struggle manifests in their actions—donating to an evangelical church and investing in insurance policies—both of which seek to provide solace and reassurance in the face of mortality. Through a careful exploration of the intertwining themes of fear, capitalism, and faith, the poem critiques how societal structures exploit these fears, leaving individuals in a state of anxiety and bewilderment. The poem analyzes these themes and draw connections to the broader implications of the speaker’s experiences.

The Anxiety of Mortality

The poem opens with a blunt admission: “I’m afraid of dying.” This fear is not depicted as an abstract concern; instead, it is deeply personal and immediate, conveying a sense of vulnerability that resonates universally. The speaker’s acknowledgment of their fear invites the reader to confront their own existential anxiety. The repeated refrain underscores a cycle of uncertainty and insecurity, emphasizing how this fear drives the speaker’s actions.

The speaker’s fear of the unknown—“where I’m going” and “when I’m going”—highlights the human tendency to seek control over the uncontrollable aspects of life. In an attempt to mitigate this uncertainty, the speaker engages in the practice of tithing to an evangelical church: “I give tithes to an evangelical church / that covenants with me, / I won’t burn, / if I pay my own way—to get into heaven.” Here, the act of giving becomes a transaction, suggesting that salvation is contingent upon fulfilling financial obligations. This dynamic illustrates the commodification of faith, where spiritual assurance is exchanged for monetary gain, reflecting a critique of how religious institutions may exploit the vulnerable fears of their congregants who lack faith.

Capitalism and Its Discontents

The subsequent stanza introduces the realm of capitalism, with the speaker stating, “I give premiums to an insurance company / that promises to me, / that my children’s lives won’t become hell, / if I pay their way, too.” In a society driven by capitalist values, the speaker’s reliance on insurance becomes a metaphor for how commercial entities prey on individuals’ fears. The notion of financial security for one’s children transforms into another transaction, perpetuating the cycle of anxiety surrounding one’s mortality. The linking of salvation with monetary payment leads to a profound questioning of ethical and moral implications; can faith and security truly be bought?

The speaker’s skepticism emerges in the lines: “And because I don’t know when I’m dying, / I also don’t know / if these capitalist monopolies / can fulfill their contracts.” This line encapsulates the poem’s critical stance on the reliability of these man-made institutions. The speaker expresses a deep-seated distrust, suggesting that the very structures designed to offer protection and reassurance are unreliable. By highlighting the limitations and potential failures of these capitalist contracts, the poem invites readers to question the integrity and intentions of the systems they rely upon in times of uncertainty.

The Rhetoric of Fear

Throughout the poem, the relationship between fear and agency is evident. The speaker’s fear of mortality prompts actions that, paradoxically, may not provide the intended peace of mind. The anonymity of the “capitalist monopolies” contributes to a sense of alienation and helplessness. The realization that these entities “are only banking on me not knowing” suggests a cynical view of the modern world, where profit motives overshadow genuine concern for individuals’ well-being. The use of the term “banking” carries connotations of exploitation and manipulation, linking economic systems directly to personal fear and mortality.

The poem “Living in Fear” poignantly presents the struggle between existential fear, faith, and the machinations of capitalism. Through its critical examination of the speaker’s actions and the entities they engage with, the poem raises profound questions about the nature of security, faith, and the commodification of human experience. Ultimately, it challenges readers to reflect on their own fears and the societal structures that influence their responses to mortality. In a world filled with uncertainty, the poem serves as a reminder of the complexities of human existence and the stark reality of how fear can influence our choices.

“Many freely give it thinking it’s their way into heaven. Why would they think that? Because they are told that by the clergy… It’s a simple guilt trick that we have all fallen for and many continue falling… Now the clergy or preachers tell you that you must tithe or lose the blessings of the covenant with God. WOW. How arrogant that they decide what God has freely given they can take away… It is true that Jesus wants us to tithe but to do it in a way that is beneficial to those who need it. The poor and homeless.”

“In many cases it leads to fear and obligation motivating church members’ giving. People have this idea that God is going to punish me, if I don’t give 10-percent of my income to the church. But, even in the Old Testament, if you didn’t own land or cattle in Israel, you wouldn’t pay the tithe. So, this modern-day tithing paradigm isn’t biblical—and it actually harms the poor, who so often give to these ministries. The way that tithing is taught drives people to a calculator rather than to the risen Christ. But nothing in Christianity is a formula. It’s about living in a closer relationship with Christ, who gave Himself for us.” By: David Croteau, Biblical Scholar

“Religion is sustained by two factors, fear and guilt. And if there’s one subject that the church has used for a long time to keep people in fear and guilt, it is the subject of tithing.” By: Creflo Dollar, Prosperity Religion Televangelist

“Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.” (Mormon Church Doctrine and Covenants 64:23)

“Author Jana Riess wrote a piece at Religion News Service in December of 2019 titled, ‘I just paid my Mormon tithing. Why don’t I feel better about it?’ She notes that December is a time when church members are supposed to sit down with their bishops to “declare” themselves. That means ‘Are you a full tithe-payer (10%), a partial tithe-payer (something less than 10%) or a non-tithe payer?’ Riess noted that the LDS church stopped making disclosures to its members about its use of money in 1959 because the church “was on the brink of financial disaster” that year. She suspects the non-disclosure policy continues “not because the church is poor or indebted, but because it has grown wealthy enough that exposing the extent of its holdings could cause embarrassment and prompt unwanted questions.””JESUS entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. ‘It is written,’ HE said to them, ‘MY house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you are making it ‘a den of robbers.'” (Matthew 21: 12-13)

“But behold, it sorroweth ME because of the fourth generation from this generation, for they are led away captive by him even as was the son of perdition; for they will sell ME for silver and for gold, and for that which moth doth corrupt and which thieves can break through and steal. And in that day will I visit them, even in turning their works upon their own heads.” (Book of Mormon, 3 Nephi 27:32)

---

Confronting Mortality: An Analysis of Life, Faith, and Acceptance

The poem presents a contemplative exploration of mortality, fear, and the quest for peace amid uncertainty. The speaker’s vulnerability in confronting death drives a narrative that reflects both existential concern and spiritual inquiry. Through the use of evocative imagery and poignant language, the poem examines the relationship between fear, the pursuit of reassurance, and the acceptance of life’s impermanence. The key themes of the poem, emphasize the tension between the quest for salvation and the acceptance of life’s natural rhythms.

Fear and the Search for Reassurance

The opening lines of the poem immediately establish a tone of anxiety: “I’m afraid of dying.” This admission signals not only a personal fear but also taps into a universal human concern, laying the groundwork for the speaker’s exploration of mortality. The quest for “peace of mind” reflects a deep yearning to find solace amid this anxiety. The phrase “trade my time for subtle reassurances” suggests a transactional approach to finding comfort, illustrating how individuals often turn to external sources—be they religious institutions, societal norms, or commercial enterprises—for validation and security.

The speaker identifies these sources as “those who profit from my misfortune,” a stark critique of entities that exploit human vulnerability for their own financial gain. The correlation of “dread” with “salvation” creates a powerful tension, implying that the speaker’s search for meaning and peace is overshadowed by the realization that they may be deceived. This tension fosters a sense of unease; the intent to find reassurance becomes a burden, rather than a liberation. The phrase “while doubt still lingers near” accentuates the inevitability of uncertainty and the idea that a continuous search for assurance might only deepen one’s fears.

The Futility of Pursuit

As the poem develops, the speaker begins to question the very nature of their pursuit. The lines “I wonder if my life / is meant for more than this futile pursuit” reflect an existential reckoning. Here, there is a shift from external reassurances to an internal dialogue about purpose and existence. The metaphor of “a dance with shadows in the noon of day” evokes the complexity of life lived in fear—where even in moments of brightness, shadows of uncertainty loom—and raises profound questions about the authenticity of the pursuits we engage in.

This exploration of futility leads to an introspection about the essence of life itself. The shift of focus from tangible fears to a more philosophical inquiry exemplifies a crucial turning point in the speaker’s journey. The idea of admitting the presence of “my Savior’s Grace” suggests that the answer to fear may lie not in transactional exchanges, but rather in a deeper, more profound acknowledgment of inner strength and acceptance. To the non-believer: The Savior becomes less of a literal figure and more of a metaphor for finding peace within oneself.

Acceptance Amid Despair

The concluding stanzas delve deeper into the emotional landscape shaped by fear. The speaker states, “While I ponder, why I’m afraid of dying, / I sink into the depths of despair,” a raw acknowledgment of the loneliness that often accompanies such existential reflection. However, this descent into despair yields the “quiet resolve”—a shift from helplessness to acceptance. This resistance against the instinct to cling to life’s fleeting moments encapsulates the overall movement of the poem toward self-acceptance.

The phrase “acceptance of life’s purposes and flow” exemplifies a profound insight: the willingness to acknowledge life as it is, with all its uncertainties and transience. This acceptance is not mere resignation but rather an invitation to embrace “the fleeting moments.” The poem ultimately affirms that by recognizing our limitations and mortality, we can find a semblance of peace. The concluding remark, “while recognizing—eventually I’ll have to let go,” epitomizes a surrender to the inevitable, suggesting that true serenity may emerge from the act of letting go.

“I’m afraid of dying” serves as a meditation on mortality that deftly intertwines themes of fear, pursuit, and acceptance. The speaker’s journey from an anxious search for reassurance to a reflective acceptance of life’s fragility showcases the complexity of human experience. The poem encourages readers to confront their own fears and uncertainties, ultimately suggesting that finding peace may lie not in external assurances but within the acceptance of life’s inherent impermanence. In this delicate balance, the poem captures the essence of what it means to live courageously a midst the shadows of existence.

What is the purpose of man?

What’s the reason for being born on this earth? Christians believe that they were in Heaven before they were born and that they will return upon death. Did we come from the spiritual to the physical just to return to the spiritual? All believers know that for the spirit to live, the flesh must die! Wouldn’t it have been much easier to have stayed in Heaven with our Creator and Savior than to live in jeopardy of losing our souls in this wicked world?

Do you believe that we came to this earth to be tested? Do overcoming daily temptations and doing good deeds prove that we are faithful and worthy to return? “What does it profit, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?” (James 2:14). Is all that is needed to profess that we accept the Atonement of Jesus Christ to live in Heaven forever? “For God so loved the world that He gave His Only Begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves; it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do” (Ephesians 2:8-10).

Do you have somebody to love? Are you trying to be lovable? I know this can be difficult, especially for young adults who still haven’t found someone, or for mature adults who never became parents. But there is still time! “For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another” (1 John 3:11).

I believe we were born on this earth to receive a human body. Inside the body is a human heart that has the capacity to love. “The Only Begotten Son, Who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him” (1 John 4:9). I believe that the true test of our earthly existence is whether we will choose to love. I also believe that the reason Jesus came to earth to become our Savior is to show us how to love, for when we love somebody, we give of our physical selves.

Spiritual beings are incapable of expressing affection for someone because they are unable to give of themselves. That is the point of why we had to be born of earthly parents—to receive a human heart—and now all we must do is find somebody to love. “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them” (Ezekiel 36:26-27).

“For just as rain and snow fall from heaven and do not return without watering the earth, making it bud and sprout, and providing seed to sow and food to eat, so My Word that proceeds from My Mouth will not return to Me void, but it will accomplish what I please, and it will prosper where I send it.” (Isaiah 55:10-11)

---

Commentary: The Danger of Social Clubs Masquerading as Organized Religion

The Social Nature of Humans

Humans are inherently social beings who rely on communities for identity and support. Our natural instincts drive us to form groups, influencing our personal identity and autonomy based on which organizations we join. While some choose physical communities, others connect virtually. However, these social clubs can become breeding grounds for fanaticism. They often function like mini-authoritarian regimes, with leaders crafting doctrines to control members and suppress dissent.

Examples of Manipulation in Religion

For example, the Mormon Church actively seeks to monopolize its members’ time, finances, and loyalty. Through programs like missionary work, church-sponsored activities, and strict social expectations, it aims to keep members deeply engaged and committed to the church’s teachings. This intense focus on church involvement and financial donations often discourages members from exploring outside influences or questioning church doctrines, effectively creating a closed social environment that can be difficult to leave.

Evangelical groups, particularly in the United States, frequently form strategic alliances with the Republican Party. These partnerships are driven by shared interests in promoting conservative social values, opposing secular or progressive policies, and influencing legislation that aligns with their religious beliefs. By collaborating with political entities, evangelicals seek to secure legal protections, tax advantages, and social influence, effectively intertwining their religious agenda with political power. This alliance often ensures their safety and prominence while advancing their moral and cultural objectives, sometimes at the expense of broader societal pluralism.

The Need for Separation of Church and State

I support the separation of church and state because the choice of which social club or religious organization to join should be entirely a personal decision—free from government influence or coercion. When religion becomes entangled with government, it risks compromising individual freedoms and the principles of secular governance.

To me, organized religions often function as scams, making claims that they are the only true church of God and offering exclusive access to salvation or heaven through their leaders or prophets. These claims can be used to manipulate followers, creating a sense of dependency and obedience. Many religious institutions exploit their congregants financially, demanding large contributions, tithes, or donations—often under the pretense of religious duty, charity, or divine command. These financial demands are frequently presented as necessary for spiritual salvation or divine favor, pressuring members to give beyond their means.

How Manipulation can lead to Control

Many religious organizations also manipulate followers emotionally, creating dependency and fear—such as threats of divine punishment or eternal damnation—to maintain control. They often discourage questioning or dissent, branding skeptics as sinners or heretics and excommunicating nonconformists, which isolates individuals from outside support networks. This emotional manipulation can lead to psychological dependence, making it difficult for congregants to leave or think independently.

Because of these issues, I believe that religion should be a matter of personal belief and conscience, not something that the government endorses, subsidizes, or enforces. The separation of church and state helps ensure that individuals retain their freedom to believe, worship, or not worship without undue influence or exploitation by religious institutions seeking to maximize their power and wealth.

Consequences of a State Church

The relationship between the state and organized religion can have far-reaching consequences for individual freedoms and the health of a democratic society. When a social club masquerades as a religion, or when the state becomes overly entwined with a particular faith, trust in the government is inevitably eroded.

The state can then exploit this relationship to exert control over its citizens through the guise of religious dogma. By invoking divine authority or the moral imperative of a particular faith, the government can justify actions that would otherwise be seen as authoritarian or oppressive. This can lead to a situation where citizens are subjected to a form of “covert tyranny,” with their freedoms and civil rights gradually eroded under the guise of religious or moral obligation.

This creates a win-win situation for both the social club and the government. The social club gains increased influence and power, while the government is able to exert greater control over its citizens. Meanwhile, citizens are left vulnerable to the whims of both the state and the church, with their individual rights and freedoms compromised.

Historical Threats to Secularism

The dangers of this fusion are well-documented throughout history. When the state and religion become intertwined, we see the rise of authoritarian regimes that suppress dissent, restrict individual freedoms, and often engage in draconian behavior. The consequences are dire: citizens are denied their basic human rights, and the democratic process is subverted in favor of a theocratic or authoritarian agenda.

In such a scenario, the line between church and state is blurred, leading to a situation where citizens are forced to conform to the dogma of a particular faith, lest they face persecution or other forms of reprisal. This is a clear threat to the principles of secular governance, founded on the idea that individual freedoms and rights should be protected from the influence of any particular faith or ideology.

The Importance of Secular Governance

Ultimately, the separation of church and state is essential for maintaining the health of a democratic society. By keeping these two institutions separate, we can ensure that citizens are protected from the coercive power of the state and the manipulative influence of organized religion. Only through this separation can we safeguard individual freedoms, promote critical thinking and inquiry, and preserve the integrity of our democratic institutions.

As we navigate the complexities of modern society, it is crucial to remember that the freedom to choose one’s beliefs is a fundamental human right. This freedom can only thrive in an environment where religion and government operate independently, fostering a culture of respect for diverse perspectives and enabling a robust, pluralistic democracy.