exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity
Editor's Note: This article is part of a series; see the 8 link-icons below - each is best reviewed within a wide corpus of knowledge. My research, for 55 years, attempts to get at what's real and true. Concerning priority of the topics, there's a song-lyric, "love changes everything" - so it is with the scientific evidence of the afterlife; its reality changes everything.
the most debated topic of history
Dr. Mortimer Adler, well known for his distillation of history's 102 "Great Ideas," informs us that the subject of "God" is most discussed among the 102 down through the centuries.
However, this topic has brought out the worst in human beings (but not to Divine discredit) as "God" serves another "first" - the flashpoint and proximate cause of most of the murder and violence staining the chronicle of Man's story.
we know so little about "God"
Despite all of the heated interplay, and the bravado of those who are certain, we know so little about "God" - almost nothing, hardly anything. Not only do we "know little" but information here is virtually "unknowable." As mystic-thinkers suggest, the best we can do is to state what "God" is not; this is firmer ground.
writing about the "unknowable God"
Only with great difficulty might one proceed here. And yet, it is possible to know some few things. I invite you to survey the best thought and investigation on this subject; a personal collection gathered over many years.
bite-sized packets of information
Providing a certain sequence of thought, the following sub-article writings, it is suggested, are best reviewed in the order presented.
please click on each link-icon
The reason behind the reason for what most people believe.
Why only the virtuous find the truth.
Quotations from various thinkers on the subject of God
The Day Jesus Became God: How Constantine's church-council vote, 300+ years after the birth of Christ, changed the legacy of Jesus.
Roman Emperor Constantine, one of the great despots and butchers of history, murdered his own relatives as rivals; as such, it was safer to be his pig than his son; further, in unparalleled cynicism, Constantine delayed his own baptism until his deathbed. Why the delay? An efficient potentate must engage atrocity, right to the end, for the maintenance of the realm, so why not play one’s “get out of jail free card” in the bonus round? Taken in by his own legal-fictions, he believed his own propaganda that bloody hands might be cleansed one minute before midnight, allowing him to skate lily-white, on a technicality, to endless reward and bliss. Meanwhile, Constantine's efforts to solidify power-and-control over the rioting masses caused him to support, and railroad to implementation, a raft of fear-and-guilt “holy teachings”, playing on the universal fear of death, designed for psychological warfare - all of which, today, Christendom piously promotes as infallible and heaven-ordained. But none of this royal chicanery, of course, touched upon the real teachings of Jesus. Honoring Constantine's doctrines-as-dissimulation would be like enshrining, as eternal truth, the oppressive Third Reich policies of gangster Adolf Hitler.
The Gospel Of John was written as a polemic against the Gospel Of Thomas. The ‘John Christians’ were threatened by the teachings of the ‘Thomas Christians’ and attempted to marginalize this earliest view of the nature and mission of Jesus of Nazareth.
The gospels of Mathew, Mark, and Luke say that Jesus is man, but John directly contradicts this assertion by saying he was God.
Editor's Essay: “Why the world doesn’t need Superman”: Pondering the question of God’s seeming unconcern and uninvolvement regarding the suffering and calamity on planet Earth.
Dr. Amit Goswami: What quantum physics tells us about the scientific rediscovery of God. How does a non-material God, without exchange of energy, interact with material objects in a 3-D world?
Dr. Gerald Schroeder: "The Eternal our God is One" - that is, God is Singular Pervasive Reality. Everything, without exception, is manifestation of an eternal unity, a transcending consciousness. There is nothing else, other than this Singular Divine Totality.
Darwinistic randomness cannot be mathematically supported and, therefore, is untrue. This opens the door to Intelligent Design.
hey man, let's hear about God realization for a change
Concert for George
Royal Albert Hall
November 29, 2002
Horse To Water
you can take a horse to the water but you can't make him drink, oh no, oh no, oh no, preacher at my church likes to talk about Satan, could be that he knows him, he acts like he's possessed, I said, "hey man, let's hear about God realization for a change," he said, "we ain't got time for that, first hear of the evils of fornication," you can take a horse to the water but you can't make him drink, oh no, oh no, oh no, you can have it all laid out in front of you, but it won't make you think, oh no, oh no, oh no
listen to Sam Brown’s sensational version of “Horse to Water” at the Concert for George
One of my most astonishing discoveries about the afterlife: there is no religiosity over there - no harps, cherubs, or hallelujahs. It's a normal world of real people, living real lives, enjoying work and social activities; further, they still debate what God is like, even, whether s/he exists.
Part I: The "God" of the Bible reflects common views of deity in the ancient world: the atrocity of sexually brutalizing young girls as the spoils of war.
Part II: The "God" of the Bible reflects common views of deity in the ancient world: the "forever after" principle.
Part III: The "God" of the Bible reflects common views of deity in the ancient world: the appeasement of disinterested and aloof gods with prayer and sacrifice
Part IV: The "God" of the Bible reflects common views of deity in the ancient world: the "30 Art Masterpieces of the Ancient World" reveal an unholy union between military leader and high priest, creating a world view to support notions of god-ordained authority
each gets a chance to say something on how God personally offered a lesson
“So here’s what I want you to do. When you gather for worship, each one of you be prepared with something that will be useful for all: Sing a hymn, teach a lesson, tell a story, lead a prayer, provide an insight… Take your turn, no one person taking over. Then each speaker gets a chance to say something special from God, and you will all learn from each other.”
the apostle Paul, I Corinthians 14:26-33, The Message translation
"A universal theology is impossible," says the Course In Miracles, "but a universal experience is not only possible but necessary." Paul’s small-group house-churches brought this principle to life in a practical way.
Each person was encouraged to share with the group how she or he had received an insight or lesson-for-living from God. Memorizing or quoting scripture was not emphasized, as the resultant numerous interpretations would only divide the group and then the world into thousands of sects and denominations; instead, Paul instructed,
“Tell us how God taught you personally, even in a small way, this past week. Maybe just a glimpse or brief flash of light. When you searched your own mind, when you meditated and communed with your own soul, what did you see, what were you given from God?”
God has no favorite kids but impartially teaches all, individually, who are willing to learn. God does not offer knowledge with a closed-shop, command-style, holier-than-thou, top-down pedagogy. The letters of John, as well, declare that God, via the spirit, will personally teach us about all the big issues of life (I John 2:27). This is the real "word of God," delivered to each human heart and mind, opened to receive it.
There can be no societal division or separation when religion is approached with this non-hierarchical, individual-centered mode of teaching but, instead, a “universal experience” based upon each person’s account of God’s private tutoring.
Editor's note: Paul’s decentralized formulation of religious instruction reflects not only a respect for the dignity of each individual but a Gnostic perspective.
A pastor friend of mine, a good man, when he read the above item concerning Paul’s house-churches, commented with sincerity: “But isn’t there a danger in following one’s own ‘revelation’? How can we know if these messages are from God?” I responded, “Yes, there is a danger. For this to work as it should, one must be very honest with oneself, and not veer into illusion. The dysfunctional ego loves to wear a mask of piety and it will attempt to deceive with thoughts of pride and self-promotion.”
All this acknowledged, let us explore the alternative. The caution voiced by the pastor, in various forms, has been codified as official position in the Church at large: “The people are sheep. They will go astray if there is no representative of God to lead them. Thinking for oneself is the playground of the Devil (if there were such a being). Much better for all to adhere to time-honored doctrine; this way, we all speak the same thing, which promotes harmony and unity in the Church.”
In other words, that “alternative” is to allow someone else to do your thinking for you. Surrender your brains when you walk through the church door. Keep your opinions to yourself; better yet, stifle them, and believe.” The very word heresy means “opinion.”
The so-called “Church Fathers,” writing in the few hundreds of years after the time of Christ, often attacked the Gnostics, authors of “The Gospel Of Thomas” and many other documents (some of which pre-date the canonicals). In the missives of “the Fathers” the Gnostics were lampooned for allowing followers of Jesus to offer their own “revelations” at church meetings, pretty much exactly in line with what Paul promoted in Corinthians. “They trust in their own imaginations,” said the Fathers, “are all over the place with various crackpot ideas and concepts. Who can keep track of them all? This will end badly with a great many splinter-groups representing a hodge-podge of beliefs.”
Strangely, history unfolded precisely opposite to what “the Fathers” predicted. The Gnostics, allowing each to speak, with their many interpretations of how God works in the world, enjoyed relative peace and harmony – while “the Fathers,” the forerunners of Big Religion, would witness, over time, their efforts at strict mind-control devolving into tens of thousands of factions which have divided Christendom to this day, and continue to do.
For more discussion see the article on “The Gospel Of Thomas.”
A male-dominated Church hierarchy speaks of God employing masculine metaphor; but, an ignored part of the Bible reveals God also in feminine terms and symbols.
The Image of God, Male and Female: Part I
The Image of God, Male and Female: Part II
The Image of God, Male and Female: Part III
Primal Joy: the secret life of baby animals and the unguarded, unpretentious mind of God
Eckhart Tolle: "The word honey isn’t honey. You can talk about honey for as long as you like, but you won’t know it until you taste it; and you can talk about God for the rest of your life, but does that mean you know the reality to which the word points?"
The "virgin birth" teaching not only was added to church doctrine many centuries after the time of Jesus, but its entire basis of validity in Matthew rests upon one single mistranslated Hebrew word - just one skewed word - from Isaiah, which, in all of the Old Testament, is never, ever translated as "virgin."
Carl Sagan: What science should be teaching us about the mystery and marvel of God: "How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, 'This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant?' Instead they say, 'No no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way'."
We know so little about God. God is not a “thing” in the 3-D universe. But, like the wind, we might discern something of God’s nature and essence via inference.
The brain research of Dr.Wilder Penfield offers compelling evidence that mind is separate from, and much more than, brain. In Penfield’s findings, we see that the mind is immaterial in essence, directs the body and the brain, and from this superior position, leads us to a reasonable conclusion of the existence of spirit and God.
Analyzing the typical religious attitude.
Father Robert Benson: "God is man's greatest and truest friend, not his dreadful judge. He is not a merciful God, for he has no mercy to give because God is never offended and has no wrath. Mercy only exists as between men upon earth."
An ancient Spirit Guide, 3500 years on the other side, asserts that crushing burdens of sin and guilt are caused by humankind’s failure to enter into higher self-realization, a relationship between the thinking mind and the deeper person.
What Einstein believed about God.
What did Einstein mean, "God doesn't play dice" with the universe?
Editor’s Essay: After 30 years of investigation, here’s what I’ve found as the most convincing evidence for post-mortem survival.
Pastor Dr. Leslie Weatherhead analyzes the New Testament gospels and informs us that, late in his ministry, Jesus changed his mind regarding the nature of his mission and what the Church should be.
Late in his ministry, Jesus began to view Institutional Religion as the great enemy of spiritual society, a "den of thieves," robbing and pillaging the people, keeping them from true relationship with God.
How to start a religion.
How a dysfunctional view of God becomes an opiate of the people, a hindrance to clear-thinking, and a barrier to authentic faith.
Dante's Divine Comedy: "abandon hope all ye who enter here"
Acts 20:35. The apostle Paul quotes 'Jesus [who] said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.' But the churches today use this verse in a manner exactly contrary to what Paul said
Why God Does Not Want, and even Disdains, “Worship” Offered by the Churches.
Beauty, Part I: All great theories of science have in common a profound “elegance or simplicity of assumption,” Roger Penrose. This principle relates directly to our discussion of God.
Beauty, Part II: The abundance of beauty, at all levels, in the universe cannot be accounted for by appealing to chance. It is, in fact, substantial evidence of God's existence.
there is an old saying 'We create God in our own image' but this is only part of the misrepresentation
The great psychologists inform us that unenlightened humankind creates civilization as means to repress itself.
In this self-imposed darkness, the dysfunctional ego alternates between seeking to abuse and to be abused; to rule over others and to be ruled; to use others and to be used.
The Eurythmics sang it for us:
egoic dreams are made of this...
Sweet Dreams Are Made Of This
everybody's looking for something
some of them want to use you
some of them want to get used by you
some of them want to abuse you
some of them want to be abused...
And part of that civilization we’ve created – for, as Krishnamurti instructs, each one of us is the “world” and “society” because each one carries the seeds of evil within – part of this civilization issues as popular concepts of “God.”
When we want to abuse others, we conveniently imagine God -- thereby granting ourselves license to deal unjustly -- as harsh, unforgiving, stoically unmoved before the world’s suffering. In this re-creation of “God” we refer to him as “king” or “ruler” or “lord” or “father” or some such image of august personage.
But this high-and-mighty iconography does double duty. When the dysfunctional ego seeks to live as a fearful little child, in non-culpability, hiding under the mantle of a powerful potentate, then, in a switcheroo, the images of unapproachable “All-Father” now serve as shield, a convenient Peter-Pan excuse not to grow up, a reason to simply “believe” rather than to exercise one’s inborn rational faculties.
Popular conceptions of “God” have nothing to do with the real God, but reflect the egoic heart of darkness, which has created all civilization, including ersatz and plastic images of “God”, along with faux versions of ourselves, as well. See more on the “Cultism” page.
How did the ancient Greeks, a religious people, manage, almost single-handedly, to create what we call philosophy? Why is it that the beginnings of so many important modern fields of enquiry find their roots in the ancient Hellenic culture?
Profiling The Atheist, by Michael Tymn: Atheists tend to exhibit a certain psychological profile.
Does God believe in tithing?
Elizabeth Fry: One of my very favorite afterlife-teachers comments on the nature of God.
How Big Religion and the world have created a concept of God in their own materialistic image.
A channeled report from the afterlife informs us that God has highly honored our Red brothers and sisters for their natural religion, an elevation far beyond and above that of the materialistic Big Religion of Western civilization.
Three articles which define the essence of authentic spirituality.
What is true religion? - a discussion by Jiddu Krishnamurti. How to face one's life honestly, without distraction. Is it possible to change our lives?
The Course in Miracles insists that “God has no secrets. He does not lead you through a world of misery, waiting to tell you, at the journey's end, why He did this to you.” The Course teaches we can know God’s open, not secret, mind, and there are no plans for reincarnation in it.
The Course in Miracles, with Plato, teaches that learning of the most important aspects of life, including God, is a remembrance.
The Course in Miracles instructs that our grievances, which are attack thoughts, occur when we identify with the mortal body and the ego. The flesh encourages a fearful self-perception of "I am not enough." It leads us to believe that God is like what we have made of ourselves.
The most important thing I would share about this subject
well, that's just what a cultist would say
Doctor Strange (2016),
Stephen Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch)
and Christine Palmer (Rachel McAdams)
Christine: “So you joined a cult.”
Stephen: “No, I didn't. Not exactly. I mean, they did teach me to tap into powers that I never even knew existed.
Christine: “Yeah, that sounds like a cult.”
Stephen: “It's not a cult.”
Christine: “Well, that's just what a cultist would say.”
Editor's note: See a full discussion and definition of cultism here.
In my youth, after high school graduation, it got back to me that some of my classmates, knowing of my interest in things metaphysical and religious, were reporting that I had joined a cult; even, that I had shaved my head. This really burned me. Today, 50 years later, I smile at this memory and think of a comic routine by Michael J. Fox who, when confronted with two accusations, would vehemently deny one but remain silent about the other. For me, it would have been, “Ha! How ridiculous! I have not shaved my head!”
And regarding the charge of my joining a cult, along with Doctor Strange, I will brush this indictment aside with, “Not exactly.” Technically, I had not “joined a cult” but, rather, had transferred membership from a childhood church to one of my own choosing. Thus, it was very unfair to say that I had “joined a cult.”
Well, as Christine would point out, this is just what a cultist would say.
But here’s the problem: Nobody likes to be called a cult member. Most times, when this is done, it’s just a form of name-calling, of bigotry, of putting someone down and thinking you’re better. It’s what Tom Wolfe meant when he said that "A cult is a religion with no political power." If your church – and we’ll exclude the non-religious forms of cultism for the moment – is rich and powerful, then it’s not a cult, don't you know. It’s mainstream. How can it be a cult if “everybody’s doing it”? But if your group is a minority religion, with beliefs that are a little funky, then you’re a cult. That’s how it works. It's a way of keeping people in line and feeling uppity about yourself.
But this politicized definition of cultism is not what we’re talking about here in these writings. I make people mad by calling their respectable church a cult. But, listen to Christine, this is just how a cultist would react.
Cultism, at its etymological roots, has nothing to do with not being popular, or a lack of lobbying ability, or not drinking the kool-aid. These are contrivances, narrowly construed, that people latch onto in order to make sure that their particular cult is excluded from the definition. Nice try. (See these kinds of cheap debating tricks exposed in my “clear thinking” article.)
Let me make this plain, from another angle. You, me, and your second-cousin – everyone – we’re all headed for a new world. This one’s being given up for lost. And when you get over there, if you like causing discomfort for yourself, then you can continue in the old cultish ways – be they religious, philosophical, political, ethnic, or any sort of group-delimitation suiting your fancy. As we’ve seen, they’re called “brotherhoods” by the Spirit Guides, and there are thousands of them in the next world, all populated by those seeking for a “strong father figure.” You can join any one of them. No one will stop you. Go knock yourself out and, in fear-and-guilt, continue to surrender your autonomy to some “infallible” Dear Leader.
Editor’s note: I recently reviewed Father Benson’s “Life In The World Unseen,” and was reminded of his thoughts on this subject. He reports of those who maintain their old religions on the other side:
Each denomination, of course, holds to its own particular creed and formularies, such as it had on Earth… if the minds of people are stubborn and they are unable really to think for themselves, then do they remain shackled to their narrow religious views, thinking it to be all the truth, until a day of spiritual awakening dawns for them. Then they will see that their slavish adherence to their creeds is holding them back… they do no harm as they are, here, beyond retarding their spiritual progression. Once they realize what they are doing themselves, and take the first step forward, their joy knows no bounds. They will realize the ‘time’ they have apparently wasted.
Notice the judgment: "slavish adherence," or “unable to think for themselves,” or “shackled to their narrow religious views,” or “minds” that are “stubborn.” Yes, “they do no harm” – except to themselves.
There is one more scene from “Doctor Strange” that might help us:
The Ancient One (Tilda Swinton)
"Arrogance and fear still keep you from learning the simplest and most significant lesson of all -- it's not about you."
In these writings, I very frequently reference the “false self,” the dysfunctional ego, and therefore you might suspect that an admonition, “It’s not about you,” would find support from me. Well, certainly, “you” as “egocentric you” or “you, to the exclusion of all others” is to be rejected out of hand. The problem with easy platitudes from a movie script is that sometimes these phrases are presented by those who’ve not really explored any depth of meaning. “It’s not about you,” at the surface, seems to hint at something patently unspiritual, with not a friend in the world. However, there’s a “good” and a “bad” to this.
Cultish organizations are very quick, either in explicit teaching or by subliminal message, to sell a program of “It’s not about you.” This is code-language, however, for “You are unworthy. God could never love you. You are defective. You will never reach the high-bar but for the aid offered by the Dear Leader in your friendly neighborhood cultish group.” This is how people are controlled; specifically, by a heavy diet of the fear of death, and an existential guilt of innate imperfection.
But Summerland society is not constructed on these perverse precepts. While there is a harmony and an order to all things over there, the interests of the individual are not sacrificed for the group. In a very real way, it is “about you” in the next world.
While each sane and balanced person in Summerland takes part in various charitable service projects, these do not define one’s life – because, “it is about you.” Each psychologically healthy person in Summerland is engaged in a personal development and educational program, which might include the arts, math, science, space travel, adventure, parties, personal quiet time, friends, and just doing nothing.
One might say that society over there is comprised not of a federation, not of a centralized authority structure, but more like a loose confederation, a voluntary union, often ad hoc in nature, of uniquely talented individuals – as each of us is – who come together at times for the greater good, but, in the main, are dedicated to the proposition of reflecting God’s glory on an individual level, of manifesting the one-of-a-kind “inner riches,” of simply learning to enjoy one's existence -- which is not that easy -- and is what “made in the image” is all about.
Cults know nothing of this sacred personhood and individualization -- for them, it's all group initiative, with the hierarchy leading the group, of course -- and therefore any form of cultism takes us in exactly the wrong direction, far afield, as per God’s individualized plan for each of us.
But wait. There's another supremely sorrowful reason to avoid the cults. In that darkened frame of mind, you will never find, or get to be with, your true mate, your eternal love. Just ask Christine: