Canyon of Faith: Part 3- We All Need Love

During my recent visits back to church I've been pondering the canyon which separates the faith I once had and the faith I have now. What really separates the me from 5 years ago from the me of today? How does our understanding of the universe shape our relationship with its inhabitants? Does our definition of God have an impact on our relationship with man? As always I'm not out to bash Christianity but to wrestle with the unasked questions themselves, and in wrestling I might find some enlightenment even though the question may defeat me.

---

Love, although essential, is often denied. It should come as naturally as breathing, yet it doesn't. We choke on the fumes of fear, fear of denial, rejection, exclusion. I know I put up barriers to my heart so that I won't get hurt, but I know that's just fear. Fear is the mind-killer...

I've recently recovered an email buried away in an old email account flooded with junk mail. The email is from a friend, Paul, I've been in contact with via email. He occasionally responds to my posts and I found his recent message so illuminating I thought I would share excerpts. Paul's email was in response to the previous two post in this series, he focuses on the denial of love.

I think there is “Love” (or Source, or God, or whatever. As you state, words are constricting) and then there is “The Creation of Love” and it’s this “creation” point where we as humans go so awry.

How do you “create” love? That’s what an organized religion tries to do. Love just is. Always has been, always will be. And love is not ethereal. It’s practical and always in everyone’s best interest. Love is all encompassing. It is expressed in the smallest action, a kind word or smile, to something as large as an unending supply of oxygen via photosynthesis, a process in which the most abundant life form (plant life) takes in carbon dioxide and gives off oxygen, thereby insuring the survival of the most intelligent life form (man).

His thoughts struck me so hard it's as if I received a revelation straight from the divine, and now whenever I catch myself acting unloving I envision myself denying that person love. But why would I want to deny anyone love? Paul continues with a simple explanation.

You can’t learn to do what you are. You can only deny it. The problem doesn’t lie in teaching, modeling or imparting what you are. The problem lies in the reasons you deny it. Acknowledge and correct that. Peace follows.

Why should any of us deny love? I'm not sure about the other 6 billion people on the planet but I can tell you why I do it: fear. I'm afraid, like many other people, that my love won't be returned and that I should be loved as well. We clamor for each others love and attention like siblings battling for their parents love. I completely agree with Paul, Love is always present, we just have to acknowledge and correct the reason why we deny it to others. In a sense that is the purpose of this blog, for me to discover that I have no reason to deny the inhabitants of the world any amount of love. What separates the me from today from the me 5 years ago is that I acknowledge the denial of love and I'm actively seeking to correct it. I fail constantly but I press on. I am thankful for the incredible insight from friends like Paul and I thank him for the humbling reminder that we all need love.

Canyon of Faith: Part 2- We're all Connected

During my recent visits back to church I've been pondering the canyon which separates the faith I once had and the faith I have now. What really separates the me from 5 years ago from the me of today? Do our beliefs really make us better than our neighbors, and does our faith help us to love them any more than without belief? Why is it easier to be Right in Belief than Right in Love? As always I'm not out to bash Christianity but to wrestle with the unasked questions themselves, and in wrestling I might find some enlightenment even though the question may defeat me.

---

I often describe my spirituality, my identity, and my relationship with the universe as a god-sized puzzle (hence the title). I chose this title during a time when I struggled with my beliefs to the point of near insanity (well, I'm probably over exaggerating). As I began studying the different world religions I noticed two things: there is no one right religion because all of them are hiding skeletons in their closet, and even though they use different symbols they all seem to point to the same thing. What that is, I have no idea and might only exist in our heads. I began this journey with a mission statement: to connect with my fellow man. That to me IS the divine, not a bearded OT God or anything supernatural, but unfortunately even using the word God is problematic which is why I gravitate towards the word, 'divine' (although 'Source', introduced to me by Don at Reflections, also has a nice ring to it).

I don't experience that interlocking connection at church. The members at Calvary Baptist (the church I attend) would say that I'm not allowing the spirit of God to enter my heart in which I would respond by stating, "the spirit of God is already within us, we're just drowning it out by singing praise to a man-made God, a God made in our image." This doesn't mean they don't experience something, they do, it's just that it doesn't speak to me. I can't connect with the death and resurrection imagery of Christ on the same level as they do. It might just be that they do feel connected to each other and to God and their desire to bring people into the fold is their way of sharing this experience (which is fine as long as sharing is done in the spirit of love, without pressure and threat of hellfire). The main issue which keeps me on the far ledge of Christianity, or any other faith for that matter, is that their connection with mankind and the divine has borders, their relationship has limits. Christians can connect with other Christians, even with varying denominations, but have trouble connecting with Muslims, and so on and so forth. Loyalty to your tribe and to your beliefs supersede compassion and connection with your neighbor. The only way to keep your religious identity and truly connect with others is by holding your beliefs very gently and very lightly. The Bible doesn't have to be literally true to be spiritually true, and even if it's spiritually true at the time of it's canonization does not mean that it is exclusively true in our 21st century global society.

Why is this so hard when it sounds so easy? Do we really have to be Right in Belief instead of Right in Love? Every time a Christian questions me on the state of my soul they ask me, "what if you're wrong?" I always respond by telling them that a compassionate God would not fry an Atheist or an Agnostic for loving their neighbor. And if this "compassionate" God would indeed fry people for wrong belief than I would still continue loving people regardless of my afterlife destination. Real grace, love, and compassion can't be freely given under threat of annihilation or divine command. The source of our love for each other should come from within, from our shared human spirit. When we begin to realize our connections with our neighbor we honor their humanity and our equality. For stardust we are, and unto stardust we shall return. For as walking, talking stardust, the "fruit of the universe" to use the words of Alan Watts, we are gifted with a narrow window of existence in which to interact with the world around us. Who are we to increase the pain and suffering of others within that short window? Let us enjoy this gift, and celebrate life together before our return to the place of our birth.

Canyon of Faith: Part 1- We're All the Same

During my recent visits back to church I've been pondering the canyon which separates the faith I once had and the faith I have now. What really separates the me from 5 years ago from the me of today (other than 2 kids, a new house, and a degree)? Is it really as simple as belief in Jesus Christ or something more? How do views of ourselves and of others affect our interconnectedness with our fellow man? As always I'm not out to bash Christianity but to wrestle with the unasked questions themselves, and in wrestling I might find some enlightenment even though the question may defeat me.

---

When I hear pastors preach about the Christian life I'm always surprised how me-centered it all sounds more so than other-centered. It's all about my salvation, my soul, my personal relationship with Jesus. That's not to say that Christianity excludes other-centered language but for many believers it takes a backseat. Of course, this me-centered language is extremely helpful when witnessing to lost souls. All people yearn for love and acceptance, but I get a since that mainstream Christians believe that their love will be wrenched away from them the second they question their own beliefs. Their love from their in-group, their tribe, may be conditional but it doesn't have to be. Yet the conditions for acceptance into the group by default leaves others out while elevating the saved to a higher lofty position. Last week the pastor at the church I've been attending (I hesitate to say My pastor at My church) stated that "we're still sinners, but we are saved." I would imagine this would be very convincing language to the unsaved in the crowd, other than myself of course.

Yet, my question to the pastor, whenever I get the courage to ask, would be if we're all the same then why create an in group at all? If the divide between saved and unsaved is acceptance of life (illustrated and symbolized by the sacrificial Christ) how does this create an in group since I can't imagine anyone choosing death? We all choose life by living, we just don't choose to follow archaic tribal belief systems. This doesn't mean that the modern man of science who may want to do away with religion has done away with what religion points towards. Life is sacred, not the icons which represent life. The creative spirit of Man is sacred, not the myth which attempts to explain that creativity. We are sacred, not a select in-group or tribe, but even using the word sacred bears a sense of setting apart. I'm not trying to set anything apart but I'm trapped by language (and by my limited vocabulary) and experience. I can only experience separateness so I speak using words which define separateness. I would like to say we're all the same, we're all one, but language makes the phrase problematic. How can WE be the same, how can WE be one when we don't experience oneness? Yet this is how I would like to approach my fellow man: if I consider the stranger so deeply interconnected to myself that I begin to lose track of where they end and I begin how can I not be compassionate towards them?

But saying we're all one is not the same as saying we're all the same. The unity found in Pantheism/Panentheism (which I sympathize with but have not entirely embraced) is different from the unity most Christians would be comfortable with using their language and their set of symbols. Their goal is not to destroy the ego (if it were even possible) but to save the ego. We all start in the same place, within ourselves; we travel in the same manner by connecting with one another; and we have the same goal in mind yet we call it by different names. I believe that by saying we're saved (past tense) comes across to the outsider, the unsaved, as exclusive and demeaning to their spirituality. Being saved also sounds so final, as if we've reached a spiritual plateau while leaving the unsaved below (in the valley of death). I know the average Christian would seek to correct my understanding of the Christian faith (which I was a part of for the majority of my life) but this is how it may come across to non-Christians. We may be trapped by language but that doesn't justify forgetting our shared humanity. In my opinion, this is what happens when we enter into an IN group, we're so focused on ourselves that we forget that we're all the same. We forget we all share the same origin, we all experience suffering, and we're all in it together. We forget that we're part of the whole and the whole is a part of us.