Part I, Chapter 1. ABOUT GOD (1) Continued
TEACHINGS (1C)
In which we explore what we are taught about God and Life and look
at some of the patterns and consequences of these teachings. What are religions
actually for; why do we have them? Do we really need them?
Introduction.
OK, we get to be apart from God and here we are in a life on
Earth, and what are we taught about this?
We don’t know why we’re here. The reasons belong to God and She’s
not telling, although She ‘loves’ us.
We don’t know what we’re supposed to be doing, but we have ‘free
will’ and we’re supposed to be ‘good’ or will end up in ‘hell’.
Our circumstances have been dished up to us and we get to lump
what we have. Any free will, choice, fate; really?.
Some religions teach we have only One Go at Life and that’s it;
(‘that’s all folks, there isn’t any more’). Some religions teach Reincarnation
which gives us what?
All religions I have heard about teach that the main idea is to be
good and do the right things as defined by that religion and you’ll be safe and
will get back to Heaven, bliss, nirvana and so on. So, the only real rewards
for life are actually in heaven and thus, off earth. But what about rewards on
Earth; aren’t there any, and if so, why not?
There seem to be an awful lot of unhappy people around.
So, what happens to Choice, Free Will, Purpose, or Meaning? What’s
the point and Why, Why, Why?
Is there a religion with real rewards on Earth? Anyone know
of one? What would that be like?
WHAT IS RELIGION? (1C1)
Religions generally have 2 parts.
They teach a set of beliefs or a doctrine or a system or structure
that attempts to understand why we are here alive on Earth, allied with methods
of building this system into daily life. Another word for religion is ‘law’; we
are trying to find the ‘laws’ that govern our existence.
It is the belief system part that attempts to make sense or point
or meaning of and for our life and existence; the answers to the why.
This discussion deals with the belief system part.
It is the rituals and symbols parts that build and keep this
system in the awareness of daily life and practice; ‘do this in remembrance of
me’.
All religions have teachers who learn and ‘hold’ this
doctrine/religion/belief system and pass it on to the next generation. It is
much more difficult to continue said religion if its ‘holders’ or ‘keepers’ are
eliminated along with their texts. (Others have worked this out too.)
WHY ARE RELIGIONS SO IMPORTANT? (1C2)
They help us support ourselves in the difficult business of
living, by giving meaning to life and guidelines for our behaviour. Our social
structures depend on them. This ‘point’ or ‘meaning’ affects our feelings,
emotions and consequently our behaviour at a very deep and pervasive level,
whether we are conscious of it or not. We look to religions for comfort and
support in the face of the unknown and they (religions) affect our psyche. Our
emotions and behaviour affect our social structures and why and how we have
them. Failure to find any real meaning for life leads to psychological
problems, and thus failure to function properly or even to be able to find any
‘place’ or purpose for ourselves within our social structures. The whole point
of ‘social structure’ is that any and every person is a part of a social
structure that affects and is affected by that person. If ‘selfishness equals
the only meaning’ is now our main prerogative for all, which is the general
tone broadcast by the media, what happens to other people in that social
structure, especially those with less power to be selfish? (It is now more
common to see on TV some of these breakdowns in social structures. Watch how
difficult it is to use the policing system alone to control the behaviour of
people for whom society and its values have no meaning.)
One of the things about life on Earth that we find the most
difficult is that we don’t and cannot know the future, and hence we are always
kind of ‘flying blind’. Yet we know that the choices we make now affect our
future later. Therefore the question is what sort of actions of ours help us
have better outcomes? We like to think we have things under control here, but
we don’t. Does that make us powerless? We use religions as guidance or
navigation systems for the choices we make in daily life with maybe an eye to
the consequences, and these daily choices are legion; large or small, there are
an awful lot of them.
Useful human religions are the foundations for building peaceful,
loving and fulfilling societies with a place for all. How do we do that?
WHAT ARE THESE RELIGIONS? (1C3)
What are these religions and their beliefs and what do they have
in common and how are they different? Well, here are a few things that are
common to all religions.
Life Eternal. (1C3a)
Just about all religions that I am aware of have a ‘life eternal’
concept. The disagreement is in how it is spent; in Heaven or Hell, both of
which are Off Earth, or Reincarnation on Earth until you ‘get it’ and are then
rewarded for that by being able to get off Earth and back to heaven for good,
and so on.
Single or Multiple Source. (1C3b)
Religions can be based on a single source, one god of all there is
which we refer to as God, or a multiple source. I’m not going to go into
multiple source religions in this discussion because it is not relevant to my
ideas about life and how it works. While a single source as unity is difficult
to comprehend within our dualistic earth experience, the unity concept is
essential for actually understanding our own needs; see below.
Sin and Suffering. (1C3c)
All religions that I’m aware of have concepts such as ‘you’ve done
something wrong if you’re here’ for being alive. Suffering is basically
‘built-in’ and is punishment for your ‘sins’. Hence there is intrinsic blame on
you; life is so bad you must have been bad; this is very closely allied with
any ‘rewards’ in the system.
There is no concept that there could be a good reason for this
discomfort, if there is something better at the end of the process’, which
there is.
Rewards are ‘off-earth’; not on. (1C3d)
The rewards for our behaviour are either heaven or hell (with
nothing in between?), neither of which are on earth, as in, they are Off-Earth.
We find life on earth difficult and try to get away from it if we can. There
are no concepts of real rewards on earth; much less what they might be.
The reward for doing the right thing is generally thought of as ‘Heaven’ or
‘Nirvana’ or bliss and probably feels pretty heavenly. This is the state we
wish to be in, and currently, ‘good behaviour’ and meditation are the way to
get there, if you work very hard for a long time. (On the other hand, nowadays
‘everybody’ gets to heaven, ‘cos God is very loving and forgiving, so can we
now do as we please?) Historically, in the West, there have been lots of
methods, but almost all of them have been at the cost of the body in some
manner, eg, flogging, burning, deprivation in some form or other, and so on,
basically as punishment for ‘sin’.
RELIGIONS CAN BE CLASSIFIED IN 2 WAYS. (1C4)
One method of contrasting the differences between religions is
that they can be classified into 2 different groups that I will label as
‘One-Go’ religions, versus the ‘Many-goes’, which we refer to as Reincarnation.
Within these 2 groups, it is interesting to look at their reward systems. Are
they on- or off- earth?
One-Go Religions. (1C4a)
Most Christianity based religions are single life teachings, as
in, One Go at life. (Q. Are there any current Christian Reincarnation
religions?) One-Go religions use authority and require belief in what we
are told and lots of rules, and employs fear if we do not believe, i.e.
“if you believe this and do the right thing you will be ‘safe’, (of course!).
This means that many people are being cowed into behaving ‘properly’ and of
course ‘believing’; and then what happens when life bangs you around as it is
prone to do? Have you been insufficiently careful? Another theme is, ‘you must
believe this or you will go to hell forever’. They are thus fear-based
religions. They talk about ‘love’ in the face of what feels to us like an
entirely unloving and arbitrary treatment of us personally in our lives. We
must lump this single ‘One-Go at it’ life (and hopefully no more) as best we
can because we are all sinners; even if we have no idea how we’ve done that.
Within this structure concepts such as ‘you are always at choice’ make no sense
at all. The basic teaching is that we can’t find out or know for ourselves or
we can’t sort it out or understand it for ourselves in human terms. If we think
we have, we’re in the wrong religion. We need others to intercede for us with
God; a strategy which is a prominent feature of being a peon in any authority
structure. (Do I need to spell out that peons get ‘peed on’?)
One-Go religions basically make no sense. One life of itself is
such a totally arbitrary thing. We therefore need to be told what to believe to
support ourselves in this ‘lottery’ of life. It is actually the fear of
whatever is threatened that is driving the need to believe. These beliefs based
on fears are unavailable to the logic that they make no sense. Being told what
to do and just believe leaves us as children and unable to work it out
ourselves, or even begin to do so. These are the key elements in any power and
control authority structure, and why do we need one of those between us and God
if we are all children of God?
There is also a great deal about the fighting between God and the
devil, or good and evil. This concept moves us straight out of the unity of God
and into the duality of the human world on Earth. As soon as we do that we go
into judging whether or how something is good or bad, and can never come to any
concept of unity such as ‘it’s all good’ which tends to come from more Eastern
religions.
[I also wonder how much a One-Go teaching leads to a sort of
‘camping’ attitude to Life on Earth. “Sauve qui peu” (save yourself - if
you can)]
The problem with these teachings is that nowadays we have various
psychological methods for actually finding out why we’re here and what we’re
supposed to be doing, as well as finding information from past lives. Such
enquiries are not even particularly difficult to carry out. None of these
concepts ‘fit’ into these belief systems any more. These old wine-skins are
having a lot of trouble with the new wines.
Reincarnation. (1C4b)
Reincarnation religions teach many lives. The divide between
One-Go and Many generally corresponds to the basic division between East and
West. ‘Many lives’ makes more sense in terms of meaning and point, but some
reincarnation religions ascribe blame and judgement to someone’s current life
circumstances as being an outcome of their previous life. You have been born in
great circumstances, you must have earned it. Congratulate yourself. You have
been born in rotten circumstances or low caste etc, and therefore you must
deserve it and are left in it. The concept of ‘karma’ still has judgement and
blame attached to it, as in, we think we can know clearly whether the person’s
life circumstances are ‘good’ or ‘bad’. We consider that no-one in their right
mind would choose to suffer as many people do in really rotten circumstances.
In fact, however, it is not possible to tell, and we may not know the ultimate
reason for someone’s circumstances; not to mention, neither do they.
Neither does the West necessarily envy the social structures,
civic utilities or legal systems of cultures based on these religions.
Feudalism and corruption appear to be rife in these systems. Feudalism is
probably fine for those on top; pity about anybody underneath. As for societies
riddled with systemic corruption; democracy and justice fly out the window,
never to return. Feudalism, corruption and injustice all go hand in hand.
There is also other ‘stuff’ about Reincarnation and being an
animal in past or future lives, but as human beings ‘made in the image’, our
concerns are with understanding ourselves as part of God, and there’s enough in
that to keep us fully occupied.
It also seems to me that the Eastern religions’ attention given to
the ‘spirit’ comes at the expense of the body, which appears to be regarded as
something that simply carts you around throughout this ('illusory') life.
CONCEPTS RELIGIONS HAVE DIFFICULTY WITH (1C5)
Most religions I am aware of have quite a lot of trouble with some
major parts of our lives.
Religions and Women. (1C5a)
No current mainstream religion that I know of is able to treat
women as equals or fully mobilize their abilities within their hierarchies;
(Does Buddhism fully address this in both Eastern and Western societies???).
This basically leaves out half the population.
For many religions women are passive recipients if allowed in at
all. These religions are based on male perceptions of the world only. All of
them leave women with no knowledge or realisation or description of just
exactly what women’s real attributes and strengths are. The failure to fully
incorporate women into any religion’s structure shows us that that religion is
covertly or overtly discounting women, and such a religion is, by definition,
simply incomplete and way past its use-by date, according to me. How can any
religion be taken seriously when it effectively discounts half of humanity?
Future generations will wonder how on earth women put up with this nonsense for
so long.
Religions and Nature. (1C5b)
Where are the religions that give Nature her voice in our lives?
We can get whiffs of the possibilities with Wicca or Shamanism or North
American Indian or Toltec teachings, but these are hardly mainstream. Nature is
God too and we are part of Nature. If we can’t respect Nature and the natural
world around us, we can’t respect anything.
Where are ‘till and keep’ in our lives? This was a prime directive
given to Adam and Eve by God, by which it sounds to me as though God thinks
that humans should actually have to do something. I don’t see much of this in
our religions. How much of the natural world has been anything but ‘kept’?
It is long past time for an understanding system that
automatically includes respect for women and all Nature and Life.
Sin and Suffering. (1C5c)
We need to be apart from God to See Her properly and experience
and find ourselves, but we generally hate it and want to get back to the
‘heavenly’ feeling of being a part. Most religions that I can think of imply
that we must have done something wrong or offended God in some manner to be
‘thrown out’ or evicted from Heaven, so to speak.
This understanding system that I am proposing says yes, it’s
uncomfortable, but there is a good reason for this discomfort, because there is
something better at the end of the process, and in fact, there is no other way
of obtaining the insights into life that we need and can learn for our own
benefit.
Apart from that, what happens to Explore, which is a primary drive
for Life?
Big Structures. (1C5d)
Some religions have large authority structures and some have
almost none.
Large authority structures are built on having a ‘top dog’ in the
know and of course able to talk to God and receive His commandments, and lots
of subservient people who ‘don’t know’ and have to do as they are told. Such an
authority structure may not necessarily behave in the way that they teach. All
authority structures I know of lose the plot eventually and start to exist only
for themselves and their own power structures. If people knew for themselves
how to find point and meaning for their own lives without a ‘top dog’ or an
authority structure to do it for them, there is no need for the structure at
all.
Our religious founders. (1C5e)
Our version of God is also related to our religions’ role models
here.
The main founders of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism have
interesting things in common. The basic stories as they are told, are of single
males who do not relate to women at all, and who single-handedly find
‘heavenly’ states and thus become ‘the one who has the Answers’ and so can tell
everyone else what to do from ‘on high’. These ‘founder’ stories are also very
static. None of them appear to be involved in work or effort to ‘till or keep’
anything.
Women and Life on-Earth don’t get much of a ‘look-in’ here. If
‘till and keep’ is a prime directive from God, why do these great role models
have nothing to do with such ordinary mortal things?
Telling others what to do from ‘on high’ is thoroughly ‘BC model’;
enforcing it is P&C. (See ch.5)
Both Jesus and Buddha had major truths to say/tell/express. The
religions that sprang up around these truths are not necessarily as useful. The
dominant Christian religions of today generally teach P&C model, (See Part
II, Chapter 5). Add Spirit’s off-earth concepts and we have very little idea
left of what Jesus was trying to say.
This is not to say that some of these doctrines and rules for
living are not ultimately useful to us, but I am saying that these
understandings are incomplete, and not that useful as maps for finding
fulfillment on earth.
So, how come we have these ‘incomplete’ belief systems in the
first place? My answer to this is developed further on in this book because it
(the answer) requires further definitions of terms. If we understand how these
systems arise, it is much easier to understand what is missing and rectify
that.
************** ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ******************
I have discussed the things that I consider God might be wanting
and have then looked at those things that we are taught that God is telling us
to do, so that it is easier to see the difference between them. To recapitulate
on the themes discussed so far…..
A RECAPITULATION OF POINTS FROM THE LAST FEW SECTIONS. (1C6)
·
We are here on Earth in a
beautiful and amazing environment (hopefully not too mucked up) of staggering
creativity.
·
We are not here just to
look for ways to get back to Heaven, which is something we already know
anyway.
·
We are here to explore and
learn who we are; to know ourselves and to create and learn to be like God, and
become a partner to God and ‘do God’ i.e. do the same as God in our own unique
way.
·
We have to be separate from
God to be able to See God; we have to learn to be apart as the child must grow
up to be an adult who can then appreciate and partner the adult from whom she
came. Growing up is not necessarily comfortable or easy but it has its
compensations.
·
We have lives of great
diversity with multiple themes to help us define ourselves to ourselves. As
with all our many dramas and plays that we watch on the stage, they may not all
be wonderful or nice, but they are pretty enthralling and absorbing
nevertheless and we learn as we go along. These lives are for us to use to
explore our limits and to find out who we are.
·
We get to find out for
ourselves who we are, as in, no-one else can do it for you; it is actually
impossible to be ‘told’ unless you already know, otherwise you will not hear
what is being said.
·
We are not here because
we’ve done the wrong thing or God is cross with us; far from it. It takes time
– all the time in the world and out of it – to explore yourself and who and
what is there.
·
Playing harps for eternity
in heaven or cooking or freezing in hell does not satisfy the drive/emotion of
‘Explore’ and thus makes no sense for God or us. What else do you propose?
It is these points that need to be addressed by any viable
doctrine/belief system. We need much better maps and guidance than ‘just do as
you’re told’ because somebody said so, or any need to frighten us into ‘good’
behaviour.
THUS, WHAT WOULD BE NICE TO BE TAUGHT ABOUT WHAT GOD WANTS? (1C7)
·
An understanding of how we
choose the lives we lead in line with our highest good, as in, benefit for all.
What for and why, giving us point and meaning to our endeavours that is logical
within its own rules. This would support us, physically, emotionally, mentally,
and ‘spiritually’ (P.E.M.S.).
·
Rewards on earth while we
are alive, and tools for how to get there and what it looks like on the way, ie,
a map.
·
A full, equal and important
place for women and nature.
·
Requiring no hierarchy or
authority structure; learn how to talk to God/Life yourself; none of this
threatening as a means to make us behave properly.
·
Based on human
psychology that is natural and makes sense and we can see it in everyday
life, and thus remind ourselves, if we wish. No ‘believing’ required.
This could be called a Useful Understanding System (UUS)
or a Useful Guidance System for Life on Earth.
This UUS proposed here and following is a psychological map. It
does not tell you about yourself personally; it is basically a structure and
map and tools for finding your own Self for yourself. The tools work best and
make most sense within this structure, but can be used without this
understanding system; so there is no need to believe in anything, including one
life or many. However, using these tools helps you to understand this structure
and live it and grow.
It is a,
·
Why and How to Use your
Life (your external world/circumstances) to find/identify/understand/Know and
Own your own self and develop your own Relationship/Partnership with God, and
thus Life.
·
Why and How to take
responsibility which leads to conscious personal choice and empowerment and a
proper engagement with Life; a ‘talking with God’, so to speak, and thus will
give us meaning for our lives and our choices, conscious or unconscious.
Essentially it works within a framework which includes …
·
Universal laws, viz Mirror
Laws and personality filters such as MBTI , all of which need to be applied to
See ourselves properly and
·
Understanding our past
lives and how our actions then, with the decisions we made about them then,
have influenced this current life, as in, how we have got to where we are.
All of which are to be outlined in detail below.
Conclusion.
Our current mainstream teachings with their emphasis on getting
away from earth and life as fast as possible are not particularly useful to a
great many people. If we do not understand the reason for our separation and
apartness from God, we do not know what to do or what is required or why.
Society now knows a great deal more about human psychology (hopefully) and is
in a position to look for belief systems that make a great deal more sense than
the ones we have already.
Now we need to look at our actual connection/relationship with
God.
GOD & HER PARTS (1D)
Introduction.
This section looks at the actual relationship between God and Her
parts. There are 2 bits within this section.
·
Part to Partnership with
God - more about the part having to be apart.
·
Our connection with God -
what might that be?
1. OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD. (1D1)
From being a part to being apart to being in partnership with God.
From Being Part of God to Being Apart from God. (1D1a)
When we are a part of something it is quite difficult to See or
Know what that something is. We identify with that something rather than with
ourselves, and then cannot know how we are the same or different.
When we are apart from something, it is much easier to See that
particular something in its own right, and to use the distance apart to find
out more about the differences between us.
The 'Coat-Hanger' and the Absolute Opposites (AOs). (1D1b)
The basic structure/model for this relationship between God and
Her parts is this ‘coat-hanger’ (upside-down?) on which we can and will hang a
great many concepts.
(Diagram 1D1)
|
AO1
|
A PART
|
|
APART
|
Contrast
|
|
AO2
|
|
PARTNER
|
|
Resolution
|
What is this diagram showing?
The first line shows a contrast between 2 opposites which in this
example are, being a part of something and being apart from something. I refer
to this pair as the first Absolute Opposites; the AO1. They are the 2 ends of a
continuum which stretches from being a part to a little bit apart to a long way
apart. This is a duality.
We use Contrasts to See and differentiate between opposites, and
the further apart/away we are, the more we can See, as in, ‘Consciousness
loves Contrast’. Life is composed of infinite dualities.
The second line is the opposite of both these ‘ends’; it is the
opposite of the opposites. I refer to this concept as the second Absolute
Opposite; the AO2. It is neither one end of the AO1 continuum nor the other. It
has also gone from the two separate ‘ends’ or opposites, to the single concept
of ‘partner’ that has unified or resolved the separation; the duality has
'resolved' into a 'unity'.
The AO2 always has the effect of being ‘above’ the AO1s, in that
it includes both of them, while at the same time it makes the contrast
between them particularly clear. Thus we can ‘See’ them more clearly.
Another way of saying this is that the AO2 clarifies or ‘locks in’ or ‘holds’
the contrast of the AO1.
This AO2 is Jung’s ‘transcendent function’ and a very important
function it is, but it is also one of the properties of Energy. See also Energy
section.
“In holding the tension between opposites, a 3rd thing will
appear that transcends the opposites and resolves the conflict.” LOPKER
p.167 (quote)
In this particular example of apart and a part; the part can
learn to be a partner as well as play its own part, once it knows how to be
apart. This is a very important and useful concept.
I will be using contrasts, continua and opposites further down the
track.
It is through this logic that I suspect that God is wanting
partners, and really, this whole UUS is built on this hypothesis. It makes
sense to me.
Another pair of opposites could be
|
WITHIN
|
|
WITHOUT
|
|
|
WITH
|
|
but I find the part, apart, partner more useful.
So many of our religions imply that getting back to being a part
of God is where we ‘ought to’ be aiming or heading or ‘it’s the reward for life
on earth’. But what if we are meant to embrace being apart as the way we get to
explore our own energy and define and refine our own understanding/knowing of
ourselves?
Thus, as we learn to be fully apart, we become more able to be a
partner with God, as well as playing our own part in life.
Then how do we relate to God within this concept?
2. WHAT IS OUR ACTUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD? (1D2)
How do we grasp this relationship with God in human terms? One way
to ‘get at’ this is to go back to what Jesus was trying to say. Jesus describes
the relationship between us humans and God as father to son, or parent to
child.
So what happens physically and psychologically between parents and
their children?
Physically. (1D2a)
The primary connection between parent and child is of physical
blood, ie, of our DNA. This connection exists regardless of whether or not
there is any later personal relationship between the parent and its child; ie,
this connection cannot be broken by anything. Part of the father’s DNA is in
the child and there it stays as an integral part of the child.
Thus, I think Jesus is saying that no matter what we care to think
about this connection, part of God is within us whether we know it consciously
or not, and it cannot and does not go away.
Psychologically. (1D2b)
If God wants the part to be apart so that it (ie, us human beings)
can become a partner, how might this work? What are our religions trying to
say? What would be a human equivalent if there is one? How could we describe
that?
In Jesus’ time it was normal for the son(s) to join the father
working in the fields or a trade. I think this relationship is what Jesus was
trying to describe. He was always trying to use human concepts to
describe how God and Heaven ‘felt’ to humans. We have lost some of these
meanings because we have lost some of the social organization of Jesus’ world.
We are entirely used to referring to God as ‘the Father’, but
‘son’ seems to have shifted to ‘only Jesus’, when in fact I think we need to be
really clear that we are all children or parts of the Unity we call God and are
taught to think of as Father. We are a part of God as the child is a part of a
parent. The child starts off as a part of the parent and ends up apart (as in,
different) from the parent.
Thus, our relationship with God is as a partnership with a loving
parent, wherein we grow from child to adult.
The child learns with the father while it works with him in the
family as he grows up, and continues to work in partnership as an adult, and
ideally each delights in the other. They are learning about themselves as they
notice their differences and their similarities. Also children generally yearn
to be like their parents (if all is well).
Notice that this is within a loving family where the parents love
the child and want it. They care about it and for it and protect it, and are
interested in it and enjoy having it around with them; in short, they serve
the child’s needs and like being with the child. (I may be banging on here
a bit, but this is simply not always the case. A good proportion of children would
experience the family as anything but.)
This is a loving relationship that grows and continues to grow as
a sharing relationship, and a delight in each other and both ‘grow’ in terms of
learning about themselves from each other and from Life; each becomes more
conscious within their own selves, which is the reason for life.
In effect, this is an absolute win-win situation. God loves it.
The child (us) loves it. And what is created through that partnership not only
has a life of its own and can live on to give life and growth to another, but
it gives great satisfaction to both in that partnership in having created that
new life.
Thus, the adult parents the child who grows up to be a partner to
the parent, and has its own children etc, etc. Hence, this is our own human
family model which is in front of our noses all the time as the model for our
relationship with God.
And so life continues, eternally.
We could set up a diagram thus. Here’s another set of ‘coat-hangers’.
(Diagram 1D2)
|
PART
|
PARTNERSHIP
|
APART
|
|
within
|
with
|
without
|
|
parent
|
together
|
child
|
|
|
and create new life
Bringing in the Holy
Ghost
|
|
THIS PARTNERSHIP CAN CREATE NEW LIFE. (1D3)
When new life is created through a ‘partnership with God’, as
happens in a loving relationship between 2 people of like mind and intent
working together, something mysterious happens as this new life ‘comes in’.
This created thing has a life of its own, and yet these 2 people weren’t really
bothering to or trying to do anything except enjoy having a lovely time
together. (Sound familiar? That’s what metaphors are for.) Where did this life
come from? We don’t know; it’s a mystery, and stays that way. Jesus refers to
this as the ‘Holy Ghost’, as a name for a ‘factor’ that we don’t understand but
is always involved. This is the trio of ‘Father, Son and Holy Ghost’, which is
a denotation of the 3rd life that arises from the proper relationship between 2
equal entities.
This act of Creation of New Life brings great satisfaction to both
of them. It is very satisfying, in fact fulfilling.
My premise is that many of us are looking for this state of
satisfaction and fulfillment, both of which give a ‘fed’ feeling emotionally.
This state of having fulfilled one’s Self also brings peace and rest.
GOD WANTS PARTNERSHIP WITH US AND SO DO WE WITH GOD. (1D4)
In this manner, we can use an earthly human experience of
fulfillment and satisfaction to extrapolate back up (you might say) to what God
might be wanting for Herself as well as for us.
Thus and so, if we as children of God are able to grow up and
define ourselves and know ourselves so that we become increasingly
apart/different while still being part of society, we will be able to come into
a partnership with God that feels wonderful and creative for both of us.
Then as the child becomes an adult, this partnership continues on
an equal basis, because partnership and collaboration require the ability to
communicate with each other (talking to each other) as equals. (Which
religions include such a concept?)
This communicating with each other as equals implies that ..
·
We both (God and
ourself) want to communicate, which is what I think Jesus is trying to
tell us.
·
We have direct access
to God in a natural manner,
·
We have worked out how
God communicates with us, according to our own natural abilities and
tendencies, (our own apartness or individuality)
God wants to communicate. (1D4a)
The logic of this UUS argues that She does indeed wish to
communicate with us.
Direct Access in a Natural Manner. (1D4b)
This is rarely spoken of, but one place in the bible that I am
aware of where man talks to God in a natural human way is in the Garden of
Eden. (See Adam and Eve addendum.) It is here that ‘God comes walking in the
Garden’. Notice that we don’t seem to ‘talk to God’ when we are in heaven;
there are no references to this happening anywhere. If we are a part of God
when we are in Heaven then of course there is no need to talk to God. But the
Garden of Eden is one place where it is taken for granted that this is part of
the natural course of events and we don’t query it.
Those people who have learnt how to talk to God seem to find that
living on Earth is a pretty good place to be. So, maybe as we come into
partnership with God and learn how God talks to us, we begin to enter the
Garden of Eden.
And maybe, a ‘coat-hanger’ diagram of the AOs looks like this.
(Diagram 1D3.)
|
HEAVEN
|
|
EARTH
|
|
|
GARDEN OF EDEN
|
|
How God communicates with Her Parts.
This is a large topic which will be developed in the Goal-Setting
section, but it is up to each individual to identify for themselves how
God/Life connects with them and what this actually means to that person.
Conclusion.
Thus and so, this UUS includes the logic that partnership with God
happens in the Garden of Eden; viz. when we are able to ‘walk and talk with
God’, we have found the Garden.
Thus, we are on earth to work out how to do that and what it
sounds like, looks like and feels like to us personally.
Partnership with God; talking with God/Life and finding the Garden
of Eden all happen while On Earth. They don’t happen when we are Off
Earth.
These things are the earthly ‘rewards’ we are actually looking
for.
Notice also that these ‘rewards’ are not the end-point of the
process of life on Earth. What they do is bring us more Life and we can grow in
that to include even more Life with greater rewards as we grow.
It is this structure of understanding as well as the processes of
how we get into this Partnership and find the Garden, that are outlined over
the following pages.
It is an On-Earth Useful Understanding System (UUS) of what God
wants for Herself and Her parts.
So, now that we have looked at what we think God is wanting and
what we are taught about that, we need to look at how human beings are ‘built’
psychologically.
No comments:
Post a Comment