Why one might prefer to use the term "God" even outside of religion

If it's true that everything is connected and all things are one, then all answers are within us. Quiet reflection, meditation may provide the answers we seek.
 

Mr. Ed said:
I am at a neutral point of understanding in that I always assumed there are things I attribute to god without hard evidence these are the result of and from god. The problem I have relating to god is Christianity. In my world of understanding Jesus goes hand in hand with god and that seems like extra baggage when all I want is a relationship with god, not through Jesus. Why do Christian's insist the only way to god is through the son of god? I just don't buy. Jesus seems more like fairy tale than the possibility of one god of which i adhere to.

Christian's are stuck on Jesus and I don't see the attraction. I don't accept Christianity as the only to have an understanding and a relationship with god. God connects us with all that is and was created in whatever way it all began and continues to be. Religion has it's own agenda and restrictions for the common purpose. God just happens along to sweeten the pot in an effort to gain members to fulfill its purpose on earth, under disguise of good and wholesomeness.

The problem with religion, people accept it as the only way to know god. I disagree. Humans have the capacity to know god without religious interference, but people see this as blasphemy because religious institutions teach us this way for their own personal gain. I go to church primarily for my wife and friends who also attend church services, not to worship Jesus or partake in communion, but to be near people I care about. No one there, except my wife knows how I feel about Christianity, and I plan to keep it that way unless someone asks me. Until then, as far as everyone knows I am there to worship as everyone else.

God has never been an issue with me. Religion on the other hand is a cheap reference to god to serve mankind in their quest for spiritual development.
Click to expand...
The answer is in the name. Christians worship Jesus Christ that's why we're stuck on Jesus. Would you go to a square dance club and wonder why they were stuck on square dancing?

If you want a religion without Jesus try Islam, Satanism (guess who they're stuck on,) Buddhism is very open and inclusive about who exactly is worshipped, but Christian churches will always believe that the way to God is through Jesus because of:
John 14:6, where Jesus says, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me.".



I really think you'd like Unitarianism, Ed.
  • "Unitarians believe in a single God who created the universe, and that Jesus was inspired by God but not equal to God. They also believe that religious truth is not found in scriptures, holy people, or religious institutions, and that individuals can believe what they feel is right. "


 
Last edited:
MarkD said:
For me it is recognizing there is something sacred which is all inclusive which religion is always trying to take charge of and almost always screwing up in the process. God/gods are not their trademarked property. Claims of exclusivity are an indication of good intentions gone bad, time to look elsewhere.
Click to expand...
The mountains in a wilderness area have that effect on me, not all the time, and almost only when I am hiking alone, I'm set back on my heels in awe. I once considered that it was so beautiful, it had to be the work of a god, but movement of the Earth's crust and geology also explain it adequately.

As far as religion taking charge, that was brought home to me when my wife and I got our marriage license at the county court house. With license in hand, I said, "Now all we have to do is the wedding ceremony, and it will be official," and the woman behind the window said, "No you're married as of this minute. The license just made it official."

People already know that probably, but it got me thinking about the actual role of the minster or priest when he says, "I now pronounce you man and wife," as just a bit of showmanship. He has no legal authority or responsibility over the matter at all, yet it makes it sound like the whole process was up to him. I'm not against marriage ceremonies, but it's interesting to think about how legally trivial they are. I know, I know, it's important to people, and that's fine. Marriage is worth some kind of a celebration after all.
 
JustDave said:
The mountains in a wilderness area have that effect on me, not all the time, and almost only when I am hiking alone, I'm set back on my heels in awe. I once considered that it was so beautiful, it had to be the work of a god, but movement of the Earth's crust and geology also explain it adequately.
Click to expand...

Pretty impressive what some subatomic cue balls can accomplish binging around in their totally random yet determined manner*. Not just majestic mountains and lakes but every manner of living creature and Bach and Shakespeare. Everything is a wonder.

*Edited to make clear I don't personally believe the universe is as it is as a result of the playing out of random, mindless processes. I reject both determinism and materialism.

JustDave said:
As far as religion taking charge, that was brought home to me when my wife and I got our marriage license at the county court house. With license in hand, I said, "Now all we have to do is the wedding ceremony, and it will be official," and the woman behind the window said, "No you're married as of this minute. The license just made it official."
Click to expand...

I have a story along those lines but with a very different trajectory. When my wife and I got married we wanted to do it in the little church in the middle of Yosemite valley. Being a public park I thought I'd just explain to the minister that we wanted something pretty bare bones but especially no proselytizing. That led to a very long theological argument which I resented having to take part in. In the end he agreed to restrict his 'holy rolling' to a short bit after our vows.

JustDave said:
People already know that probably, but it got me thinking about the actual role of the minster or priest when he says, "I now pronounce you man and wife," as just a bit of showmanship. He has no legal authority or responsibility over the matter at all, yet it makes it sound like the whole process was up to him. I'm not against marriage ceremonies, but it's interesting to think about how legally trivial they are. I know, I know, it's important to people, and that's fine. Marriage is worth some kind of a celebration after all.
Click to expand...

Really the only authority invested in the minister is that which a congregation cedes to him or her. But for people who share the same mythos regarding what is sacred that is far from nothing. It actually matters more than what the state has to say about it. If I was part of such a community it would matter to me too. But I wasn't and so it didn't.
 
Della said:
I really think you'd like Unitarianism, Ed.
  • "Unitarians believe in a single God who created the universe, and that Jesus was inspired by God but not equal to God. They also believe that religious truth is not found in scriptures, holy people, or religious institutions, and that individuals can believe what they feel is right. "
Click to expand...
In an agnostic forum, there was discussion about the unique approach to religion of the Unitarian Church in that it did not require a belief in a god, although your description may be more accurate. I don't know enough about it to confirm or deny, but in reading their web site, they did refer to their services as worship. Anyway, a couple of agnostics, and even an atheist said they participated in the Unitarian Church.

So another forum member asked, "If a god doesn't have to be involved, what would be the reason for going to a Unitarian Church?" Someone else then speculated, "The bake sales?"

Regardless, the concept is interesting to me. Although, I will probably never check it out personally, because my life is just fine without any of that.
 
David777 said:
My comment was meant to criticize traditional Christian religious anthropologic views that Earth and humans have been the center of some universe master plan by some intelligent entity even though Jesus Christ may indeed share some ultimate existence as I expect. That usual view would be greatly more illogical given evidence though not impossible. For example if the god of this universe was occupied for all that delay for other reasons like (A big fun meeting with other universe gods at their favorite winter ski resort.) ;) then the issue was just understood incorrectly.

So yes gods can't be like superheros but if like UIEs they might have amazing ancient technologies that could deceive intelligent science primitives on visited planets. All this is why I prefer to use the term UIE versus god because that god term immediately conjures up magic like powers in common use. It is only now in this science era we can now evaluate how likely many things might be. For this person, time travel will never be possible especially back in time that I expect is only by nature a time forward phenomenon. Likewise thumbs down on other simultaneous dimension sci-fi ideas, warp powered hyper light speeds, matter transfer through space (ala Beam Me Up Scottie!), scifi favorites.

Such powerful entities would likely never try to explain to primitives why what primitives terms "god" or "gods" were actually not just one of their powerful entities but possibly several they were fine being called the same or different gods in each case.
Click to expand...

I don't think traditional belief systems which revolve around a mythos need explaining as something literal. The point isn't how could some advanced human-like being perform miracles. The power of myths is that they give you a poetic sense of something greater, something that has helped guide creation perhaps though I'm not wed to that idea.

You, like so many others, seem convinced that nothing can be real that can't make sense to us. But I no longer find that at all tempting. What I am sure of is that how we conceive of the world influences what find. If we look at it as a random array of atoms with nothing in particular to do with us that will constitute our reality. Those who do this often pride themselves in being tough minded realists proudly accepting a meager reality since that is all they imagine that makes sense.

But I think actually opening yourself to what is there without preconceived notions is the braver stance. Being open to what a myth speaks to you is nobler than funneling your attention to problem solving nuts and bolts analysis of what is 'really' going on. The real difference is: are you open to what is there or do you insist you already know everything needed (with the caveat that science will bring along the rest soon)?
 
Last edited:
Olivia said:
Well now, atheists even have what they call their own churches.
Atheist churches are secular gatherings that celebrate the identities and beliefs of atheists, even though not everyone who attends identifies as an atheist. They often promote values like rational thinking and materialist philosophies.
Click to expand...

I've also heard there are meetings some places just for atheists and agnostics but as @JustDave just shared -and @Della before him- there is also the Unitarian church which is basically Christianity with just God and Jesus as something extra on the side. I like that. However I don't think of God as any kind of entity apart and certainly not one I can chat with. I've considered it though. I went so far as to sign up for some forum discussions but these are by email and the discussion didn't interest me.
 
Last edited:
Indeed there are strong limits to what I might be able to imagine as ever being physically possible even from the most ancient and advanced entities, from the level of science I understand and have confidence about. A level of science today that may be greatly more knowledgeable than those of human generations past but not where we might be in say 1000 years of more technology advance. My own opinion is that some of us have already advanced enough to be able to eliminate much former imaginative nonsense. And as someone involved in a creative career, I am relatively strong thinking out of the box though that does not include where I see lack of logic that is beyond being brave.

However a majority of humans due to lack of education and knowledge, are IMO still embracing a range of comic book level thresholds of what might be possible or not so rely on authoritative others and their religion. There really isn't any effective way to debate the issue with those significantly less knowledgeable, but I can publicly offer that opinion with brief reasoning or say go onto a physics science forum where other science persons would tend to agree or read recent books, both of which I have done all my adult life versus say watching the boob tube and playing video games endlessly.

That noted, someone else may try doing the same thing and not advance their understanding of nature any more because it is so complex. In the same way, I'll never be able to understand quantum mechanics math because that ship sailed decades ago when I didn't receive advanced math studies and instead was forced into the Viet Nam War.
 
David777 said:
Indeed there are strong limits to what I might be able to imagine as ever being physically possible even from the most ancient and advanced entities, from the level of science I understand and have confidence about.
Click to expand...
I’d like to bring another perspective which Iain McGilchrist also entertains, albeit from his standpoint.

There are two fundamentally different ways of understanding the development of life and the universe. One is called the Objective Evolution (or Darwinian Model). Charles Darwin and evolutionary scientists describe the development of life in terms of physical processes, such as natural selection and random mutation, which drive the evolution of species over time.

This perspective is materialistic and objective. It focuses on how physical bodies and species evolve in response to their environment. Life evolves from simple to complex organisms, with consciousness seen as a byproduct of complex brain processes.

The other way of understanding the development of life and the universe is by what is called the Subjective Evolution of Consciousness which is a Vedanta Perspective. Vedanta, rooted in Hindu philosophy, emphasizes the primacy of consciousness rather than the physical body. According to this view, consciousness is not a mere product of material evolution but is the fundamental reality or essence of the universe.

The concept of subjective evolution implies that the physical world, including bodies and matter, evolves as a manifestation or expression of consciousness. It suggests that consciousness precedes and shapes physical forms, rather than consciousness emerging as a product of physical evolution. In this framework, the development of beings is seen as a journey of expanding awareness or spiritual realization. The material world is viewed as a realm through which individual consciousness evolves, striving toward self-realization and unity with the Absolute (Brahman, the ultimate reality).

Panentheism provides an intriguing and harmonious bridge between these two perspectives—Darwinian evolution and Vedantic subjective evolution of consciousness.

Panentheism is the belief that what we call God or the Divine, encompasses and interpenetrates the universe but also transcends it. In other words, while the universe is part of God, God is more than just the universe. This view suggests that the Divine is both immanent (present within everything) and transcendent (existing beyond the material world).

Panentheism, like Vedanta, holds that consciousness or the Divine is the ultimate reality. The physical universe is not separate from this Divine consciousness but rather an expression or manifestation of it. In a panentheistic framework, the physical and material world is an ongoing, dynamic manifestation of Divine consciousness evolving. This aligns with Vedanta’s view that consciousness is primary and that the material universe is a reflection of a deeper, spiritual evolution.

Panentheism suggests that as the universe evolves, it’s not just physical forms that are developing but also the expression and realisation of consciousness. The world, and all living beings within it, are participating in a cosmic journey of spiritual and conscious awakening. This process involves an interplay between matter and spirit: as the material universe evolves objectively, consciousness evolves subjectively. In other words, the physical world provides the context or stage for consciousness to express itself and develop.

Panentheism integrates the materialistic view of Darwinian evolution with the spiritual emphasis of Vedanta. It acknowledges the physical processes of evolution while also emphasizing the primacy and purpose of consciousness.

I imagine the universe as a grand, living organism in which the Divine essence is both the animating spirit and the transcendent source. The evolution of life forms, as seen through Darwin’s theory, can be understood as the physical expression of this Divine essence unfolding in time and space. Simultaneously, consciousness within these forms evolves and awakens to its true, Divine nature, completing the spiritual journey described in Vedanta.

In this way, panentheism offers a unifying framework that acknowledges both the physical and spiritual dimensions of existence, seeing evolution as a holistic process where matter and consciousness are deeply intertwined.
 
What is God Consciousness? - Deep Psychology

True Believers and Vehement Deniers are somewhat right in their own way, but both also tend to miss out a core fact of the spiritual life: the deepest, fullest spiritual life is not built on belief, but upon practice and direct apprehension. Without those, you have a flaccid spiritual life.

The two groups are diametrically opposed in their views, yet both miss the key point. It’s like the ugly sisters: they’re at loggerheads, but they’re ultimately still sisters, caught in the same intractable game.

The greatest mystics and saints to have lived were fundamentally spiritual practitioners. They were not believers. They were, in a sense, great empiricists. Do as they did and use the practical methodologies of any Great Tradition, such as meditation, prayer, chanting, yoga, and so forth, and eventually you will come to directly apprehend God. That is, you will experience God consciousness.

Now that we’ve cleared that up, let’s explain what it’s like to glimpse God consciousness.

God consciousness is not an idea, or a belief, or a story, or a sign of psychosis. It’s a direct apprehension of the ultimate nature of who we are and what all of life is.

There is a lot of confusion as to what experiencing God means, even among people who don’t speak from a fundamentalist perspective. That’s because there are at least 5 major states of consciousness, each of which can evoke a valid, direct experience of divinity.

For what it’s worth, I’m going to select non-dual God as my focus. It’s not that Gross, Subtle, Causal and Witness God aren’t important, but that the Non-dual contains them all and is the highest experience of God we can have, at least at this point in human history.

What is the non-dual experience of God? It is:

  • Oneness: the directly apprehended, felt sense that your identity includes everything around you, including all sights, sounds, sensations, subtle phenomena, and pure awareness itself. It’s all you, without a separate “you” to know it. Everything is part of this oneness, is an artifact of it.
  • Love: when you feel identified with everything, including the unmanifested, you feel a great sense of love and protection. You are not a little self seeing the world; you are an all-embracing Self experiencing itself in wonderful richness and fullness. Nothing is outside you. Nothing can harm you. There’s nowhere to go, nothing to get, nothing to lack.
  • Divinity: oneness may seem bland and static, but that’s not the case. The ordinary becomes divine, because you realise that everything is simply an artifact of God. Everything is divine. Everything is an expression of the one true nature of all that exists.
  • Ultimate Reality: accompanying the prior two is the knowing that this all-embracing, omniscient oneness and divinity is the ultimate reality of life. All other conceptions of the ultimate reality are mere theories or approximations.
I should also note that these dimensions are not simple “on-off” variables. They exist on a continuum.

The trouble is that unless you actually have the experience, you’ll insist that people like me are bullshitting you, trying to sell you something, or get you to join their Bible club.

Let’s use the metaphor of Neo waking up from the matrix. If anyone had attempted to explain the Matrix to Neo before he took the red pill, they would have failed miserably. No matter how they had attempted to explain it to him, he’d have been utterly unable to entertain the idea that it was all a simulation.
And even if he were to accept it, it still wouldn’t be enough. He would inevitably fall short in attempting to understand the magnitude of his delusion. He would be unable to step outside his familiar world and fathom the reality of his situation.

Only by taking the red pill and being unplugged by Morpheus and the crew could he understand the matrix and the depth of delusion he was subject to. There is no other way.

The same thing goes with God consciousness. Unless you experience it for yourself, you have no idea what it is. That’s not a judgment, but a simple fact of the matter. You can’t just learn about it.

And like how Neo in The Matrix film was permanently and fundamentally transformed when he saw the reality of his life, having just one brief experience of God consciousness can change you forever.

Sometimes enlightenment comes as a sudden, permanent transformation. But those cases are rare, and in any case the initial insight is followed by many hours of committed work.

It’s not sexy, I know, but in the vast majority of cases, enlightenment comes after years of spiritual practice. And it tends not to a one-time, orgasmic high but a process of mastery that slowly sneaks up on you.

As Shinzen Young says in this video, “although some people have a dramatic moment of enlightenment… for most people it sort of sneaks up on them. And unless it’s pointed out to them, they might not even be aware of quite how enlightened they’ve become… Usually it’s a more gradual process.”

Fortunately, we don’t have to rely on pot luck to experience God consciousness. Well-worn paths to God have existed for hundreds and thousands of years, East and West. And as the old saying goes, “Enlightenment is an accident. But we can make ourselves more accident prone.”

For this reason, God consciousness is both an ever-present experience and an arduous journey. In spiritual practice, we slowly peel away the layers of all our false ego-bound, body-bound, form-bound identity until we arrive at the One identity. All else in spiritual practice is an artefact of that.

This brings a huge sense of trust regardless of circumstances. I don’t need to force things. I can lean back a little and trust that things are deeply taken care of, even if the surface appears choppy. At the same time, it doesn’t preclude pragmatism and action; it provides a grand context for my daily doing.

I also have a fabulous sense of peace and repose that I’ve rarely experienced before. This goes beyond the outward, momentary circumstances of my life. It is the knowing that “all is well and all will be well”, as CS Lewis worded it, regardless of the circumstances. This is not an intellectual knowing, but a felt, visceral experience of my innate, unshakeable inner peace, which is divine in origin.
And the final thing I’ll say is that I see God in all, with no exceptions. There is a built-in understanding that everything that happens, everyone I meet, and everything that exists is all God-in-manifestation, or part of the consequent nature of God.
Often people make the mistake of dividing the world into “Godly” and “not Godly”. That which is high, or moral, or loving is Godly, and the rest is not.

I don’t see things like that. Sure, there may be levels of divinity, but everything is ultimately divine. It’s only our dirty mirror that veils that truth.


I apologize for posting this article rather than providing a personal explanation about myself and how I live moment by moment. As you can see, this explanation is deep and difficult to fathom unless you have experienced it personally. "God consciousness is both an ever-present experience and an arduous journey" My history proves this dealing with psychosis and starting over like a new born babe after each event. A blank mind takes the time to study each level of growth through experimentation, trial and error.

My life history is unique and a struggle most people cannot comprehend, however difficult life was is nothing compared to the reward of satisfaction and completeness I am in this moment.
"
This brings a huge sense of trust regardless of circumstances. I don’t need to force things. I can lean back a little and trust that things are deeply taken care of, even if the surface appears choppy. At the same time, it doesn’t preclude pragmatism and action; it provides a grand context for my daily doing"
 
Last edited:
Mr. Ed said:
What is God Consciousness? - Deep Psychology
Click to expand...

Very much in agreement with @Stoppelmann’s point. From your source:


“We must also recognise that the word “God” has been tainted and abused over the years by the lower levels of human development. As a result, we modern humans have developed an enormous aversion to anything God-related, and have no way to discriminate between the mythic, fundamentalist teachings and the legitimate ones.

By In everyday language, we tend to think in terms of believing in God versus not believing in God. The implication is that a Godly life is by necessity built upon belief, and is therefore fanciful and fictional, and that a Godless life is built upon reason, and is therefore logical, correct, the default choice. The latter is the position of the Vehement Denier.

True Believers deny this, claiming that Biblical dogmas are not beliefs, but the literal word of God, as-is. Scientific evidence and reason fall on death ears. They become obsessed with Bible verses, word-for-word teachings, myths and stories, metaphorical placeholder images, morality and rituals. They love the pointers, but few have ever experienced the Pointed To.“
 
Mr. Ed said:
What is God Consciousness? - Deep Psychology

True Believers and Vehement Deniers are somewhat right in their own way, but both also tend to miss out a core fact of the spiritual life: the deepest, fullest spiritual life is not built on belief, but upon practice and direct apprehension. Without those, you have a flaccid spiritual life.

The two groups are diametrically opposed in their views, yet both miss the key point. It’s like the ugly sisters: they’re at loggerheads, but they’re ultimately still sisters, caught in the same intractable game.

The greatest mystics and saints to have lived were fundamentally spiritual practitioners. They were not believers. They were, in a sense, great empiricists. Do as they did and use the practical methodologies of any Great Tradition, such as meditation, prayer, chanting, yoga, and so forth, and eventually you will come to directly apprehend God. That is, you will experience God consciousness.

Now that we’ve cleared that up, let’s explain what it’s like to glimpse God consciousness.

God consciousness is not an idea, or a belief, or a story, or a sign of psychosis. It’s a direct apprehension of the ultimate nature of who we are and what all of life is.

There is a lot of confusion as to what experiencing God means, even among people who don’t speak from a fundamentalist perspective. That’s because there are at least 5 major states of consciousness, each of which can evoke a valid, direct experience of divinity.

For what it’s worth, I’m going to select non-dual God as my focus. It’s not that Gross, Subtle, Causal and Witness God aren’t important, but that the Non-dual contains them all and is the highest experience of God we can have, at least at this point in human history.

What is the non-dual experience of God? It is:

  • Oneness: the directly apprehended, felt sense that your identity includes everything around you, including all sights, sounds, sensations, subtle phenomena, and pure awareness itself. It’s all you, without a separate “you” to know it. Everything is part of this oneness, is an artifact of it.
  • Love: when you feel identified with everything, including the unmanifested, you feel a great sense of love and protection. You are not a little self seeing the world; you are an all-embracing Self experiencing itself in wonderful richness and fullness. Nothing is outside you. Nothing can harm you. There’s nowhere to go, nothing to get, nothing to lack.
  • Divinity: oneness may seem bland and static, but that’s not the case. The ordinary becomes divine, because you realise that everything is simply an artifact of God. Everything is divine. Everything is an expression of the one true nature of all that exists.
  • Ultimate Reality: accompanying the prior two is the knowing that this all-embracing, omniscient oneness and divinity is the ultimate reality of life. All other conceptions of the ultimate reality are mere theories or approximations.
I should also note that these dimensions are not simple “on-off” variables. They exist on a continuum.

The trouble is that unless you actually have the experience, you’ll insist that people like me are bullshitting you, trying to sell you something, or get you to join their Bible club.

Let’s use the metaphor of Neo waking up from the matrix. If anyone had attempted to explain the Matrix to Neo before he took the red pill, they would have failed miserably. No matter how they had attempted to explain it to him, he’d have been utterly unable to entertain the idea that it was all a simulation.
And even if he were to accept it, it still wouldn’t be enough. He would inevitably fall short in attempting to understand the magnitude of his delusion. He would be unable to step outside his familiar world and fathom the reality of his situation.

Only by taking the red pill and being unplugged by Morpheus and the crew could he understand the matrix and the depth of delusion he was subject to. There is no other way.

The same thing goes with God consciousness. Unless you experience it for yourself, you have no idea what it is. That’s not a judgment, but a simple fact of the matter. You can’t just learn about it.

And like how Neo in The Matrix film was permanently and fundamentally transformed when he saw the reality of his life, having just one brief experience of God consciousness can change you forever.

Sometimes enlightenment comes as a sudden, permanent transformation. But those cases are rare, and in any case the initial insight is followed by many hours of committed work.

It’s not sexy, I know, but in the vast majority of cases, enlightenment comes after years of spiritual practice. And it tends not to a one-time, orgasmic high but a process of mastery that slowly sneaks up on you.

As Shinzen Young says in this video, “although some people have a dramatic moment of enlightenment… for most people it sort of sneaks up on them. And unless it’s pointed out to them, they might not even be aware of quite how enlightened they’ve become… Usually it’s a more gradual process.”

Fortunately, we don’t have to rely on pot luck to experience God consciousness. Well-worn paths to God have existed for hundreds and thousands of years, East and West. And as the old saying goes, “Enlightenment is an accident. But we can make ourselves more accident prone.”

For this reason, God consciousness is both an ever-present experience and an arduous journey. In spiritual practice, we slowly peel away the layers of all our false ego-bound, body-bound, form-bound identity until we arrive at the One identity. All else in spiritual practice is an artefact of that.

This brings a huge sense of trust regardless of circumstances. I don’t need to force things. I can lean back a little and trust that things are deeply taken care of, even if the surface appears choppy. At the same time, it doesn’t preclude pragmatism and action; it provides a grand context for my daily doing.

I also have a fabulous sense of peace and repose that I’ve rarely experienced before. This goes beyond the outward, momentary circumstances of my life. It is the knowing that “all is well and all will be well”, as CS Lewis worded it, regardless of the circumstances. This is not an intellectual knowing, but a felt, visceral experience of my innate, unshakeable inner peace, which is divine in origin.
And the final thing I’ll say is that I see God in all, with no exceptions. There is a built-in understanding that everything that happens, everyone I meet, and everything that exists is all God-in-manifestation, or part of the consequent nature of God.
Often people make the mistake of dividing the world into “Godly” and “not Godly”. That which is high, or moral, or loving is Godly, and the rest is not.

I don’t see things like that. Sure, there may be levels of divinity, but everything is ultimately divine. It’s only our dirty mirror that veils that truth.


I apologize for posting this article rather than providing a personal explanation about myself and how I live moment by moment. As you can see, this explanation is deep and difficult to fathom unless you have experienced it personally. "God consciousness is both an ever-present experience and an arduous journey" My history proves this dealing with psychosis and starting over like a new born babe after each event. A blank mind takes the time to study each level of growth through experimentation, trial and error.

My life history is unique and a struggle most people cannot comprehend, however difficult life was is nothing compared to the reward of satisfaction and completeness I am in this moment.
"
This brings a huge sense of trust regardless of circumstances. I don’t need to force things. I can lean back a little and trust that things are deeply taken care of, even if the surface appears choppy. At the same time, it doesn’t preclude pragmatism and action; it provides a grand context for my daily doing"
Click to expand...

Not too long; a very good read! ;)

Didn’t see this at first because I was busy posting myself. Nice to learn you are not just someone who was ‘injured’ by dogmatic fundamentalism but someone who found his way to real understanding. Now I’m going back to reread what I skimmed the first time.

But a question for you or @Stoppelmann, do you suppose the five levels exist precisely because many need to get there in steps and the lower levels are simpler to attain? Since they are more attainable and transcendable in the end perhaps that has made them evolutionarily favored as a carrier of human religious experience?
 
MarkD said:
I’m guessing that thin line is the between conventional belief and anti-belief but I’ll know better once I watch it.
Click to expand...
Have you seen this version of Somerset Maugham's "Razor's Edge"? It is quite a story. This particular scene is where the heroin has been instructed to go off by himself, and meditate, read, and contemplate. He fails the interview's with the Abbot and is instructed to keep it up. The scene shows him realizing his direct experience of the "words" he had been contemplating. The searching is over. :)
 
Paco Dennis said:
Have you seen this version of Somerset Maugham's "Razor's Edge"? It is quite a story. This particular scene is where the heroin has been instructed to go off by himself, and meditate, read, and contemplate. He fails the interview's with the Abbot and is instructed to keep it up. The scene shows him realizing his direct experience of the "words" he had been contemplating. The searching is over. :)
Click to expand...

I looked at the clip but my thought was that to get to that point one would have to avoid scoffing at the whole business but also avoid rushing to embrace any particular traditional formulation. Accept where the mythos takes you implicitly but avoid immediately converting that into explicit words.
 
MarkD said:
I looked at the clip but my thought was that to get to that point one would have to avoid scoffing at the whole business but also avoid rushing to embrace any particular traditional formulation. Accept where the mythos takes you implicitly but avoid immediately converting that into explicit words.
Click to expand...
Yes, I can understand that. There is the experience of direct experience of the "big questions" ( through words ) dissolving into a wordless and immediate realization/understanding/comprehension. When we think about levels of understanding, most all religious traditions teach them. From basic/simple to transcendent/evanescent. Our Abbot called them "whispered truths". :)
 
Last edited:
Paco Dennis said:
Yes, I can understand that. There is the experience of direct experience of the "big questions" ( through words ) dissolving into a wordless and immediate realization/understanding/comprehension. When we think about levels of understanding, most all religious traditions teach them. From basic/simple to transcendent/evanescent. Our Abbot called them "whispered truths". :)
Click to expand...

I'm planning on watching it on Amazon Prime first chance I get. Bill Murray is fun and insightful actor.
 

Back
Top