|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Transcending Isms A few weeks ago, some of the atheists on one of the online forums that I participate in were asking for proof that God exists. Knowing full well that no one can prove the existence of something non-physical in a physical plane sense, some of them seemed pretty secure in their stance. That ploy is a two-way street, however, as it is equally impossible to prove that God does not exist. There is also the fact that the atheist chooses to believe in no God just as the religionist chooses the opposite. Both choose to believe something they cannot prove. As I see this conundrum, the atheists are like fish in the ocean denying that water exists while the religionists want to argue over what color it is. There first problem with all of this is, what is meant by God? If by God you mean the old guy up in the sky with the white beard capriciously playing favorites, smiting some while blessing others in ways that make no sense, then I guess I’d have be called an atheist, too. If, however, God is seen as the animating force behind all of existence, then we have something to work with. When asked where does such a god reside and how does it communicate with you, I answered: The source resides and is located everywhere, it is the animating force of all manifestation and there is no where that it is not. It communicates with you through every cell of your body and at all other frequencies you operate on. An atheist can meditate, find the silence of the mind, open to further guidance, and never have to admit to a God. We all at times receive what might be called guidance, hunches, gut feelings, urges to do something or other. And we find that when we follow these feelings, we’re glad we did, and when we don’t we wish we had. Does this all amount to no more than brain chemistry? If so, why does more meditation, particularly silent meditation, seem to correlate to more of this guidance phenomena? I see no deity in the sky, but I do think that there is a creative force or source and that we can align more closely with it to our benefit. Calling it God is just naming it. Killing for one’s version of it is insanity. I’m not defending God, who is in little need of it. I myself don’t believe in the gods of the vast majority of people on the planet. I do believe in and have great respect for what they represent, however. All of the religions and such systems are just stories trying to make sense of being and existence. Some of them have a lot of useful information on how to deal with source, but the names don’t really matter. And. this is demonstrable. Practice any of the systems sincerely and your consciousness will change. The flow can be felt and shaped. The experience is undeniable to those who have it. The basis for my assertions is my experience and the stories that the systems tell are consistent with it when they are understood. Falling back on attacking literal interpretations of the various religions’ teachings is another easy, often hilarious, but specious way to mock belief in anything other than physicality. It always tickles me when I see someone from any system believing in their creation myth while thinking that the others are silly superstition. Why would one be any less of a myth than another? Of course, no literal approach to these stories will hold up, they are allegory. The Hindu trinity is a great representation of the main forces that seem to underlie existence as we experience it. Jesus’ teachings can seem ludicrous in a literal sense, the meaning of walking on water, for instance, but they are superlative at describing the relationship between self and source, when understood. I personally work a great deal with the Judeo-Christian system, but reject the spin that the religionists have added to it—and respect and learn from all of the other systems, again separating the wheat from the chaff. I’ve always been interested in the essences of the teachings, wherever they come from. I’ve sometimes described myself as an essentialist but that is just another label. Sometimes I facetiously call myself a Guyist but this again is labeling. But if we are ever to get the most that the religious systems have to offer, we are going to need to strip the religiousity from them and apprehend the real meanings of the stories. Atheism, Theism, humanism, humbugism, they all have outlived their time. Cut through the stories to the essences of the teachings and set yourself free. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
All content and articles copyright ©2007 by Lightworks Inc except where noted. All rights reserved.