Why do we need god?

I grew up in the Seventh Day Adventist church culture and we would often have evangelistic meetings or what was called "Week of Prayer" with the stated goal of re-igniting the spiritual life. It was assumed that there was this God shaped hole in each person that needed to be filled, so the question, "Why do we need God?" was rhetorical in that context. Asking this question was a way to encourage an inward look at what might be lacking in a persons life.

It was assumed that no one would come to the conclusion that life was pretty good because, of course, humanity is fallen and under the curse of sin. And if this God shaped hole was empty this person was in need of salvation. So there was this sense of urgency and seriousness because lives were at stake and all problems would be solved once this hole was filled.

I would like to ask the question, "Why do we need God?" in a much different sense. Why do we need any type of god? What motivates humans to create all these different expressions of gods and goddesses?

In many forms of Christianity the world is portrayed as a great battlefield with a war being fought between Jesus and Satan for the souls of humankind. There is often fear that one might be influenced by Satan or even taken over. Making sure that Jesus is in one's heart is essential protection from the snares of Satan. There are many methods to make sure Jesus is in the heart including prayer and Bible study. The implication is if one leaves any part of the inner being unfilled by God or Jesus, it will leave an inroad for Satan to gain a foothold. One might make themselves more vulnerable by reading Harry Potter, using an Ouija board, doing Yoga, using meditation, magic 8 ball, or a host of other forbidden activities.

There is a belief that Satan can "whisper" suggestions to people as a way of influencing or tempting a person to do something harmful. And it is recognized that this belief might look a little looney by more moderate Christians. I think it's because there really isn't any evidence of the whispering or that there are beings doing the whispering. Irregardless this can be taken quite seriously.

One of the major flaws I see in many religions is ultimately their core is based on fear, particularly the three Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Their world views all have some version of punishment and reward. And to deal with this fear one might make up all sorts of myths to make sense of the world.

I think we can recognize that we have a subconscious that filters a lot of sensory input and summarizes it for our conscious mind. The weakness of the conscious mind is that it can only pay attention to one thing at a time, while the subconscious processes things in parallel.

There is an interesting physical model of the universe being explored that sees the world as being holographic in nature. The unique property of a hologram is that it can be sliced in half and you still have the whole hologram. If this is true of reality then all the information that makes up reality is redundantly available locally for the conscious mind to access.

We simply can't process all that information at the same time, so the conscious mind passes this through our perception in a linear fashion so that we experience life as if time is passing.

One of the goals of many types of meditation is, not to check out, but to find a state where the chatter of fear stops and we can have our whole attention available to listen more closely and thereby become more conscious. This idea that the devil is just around every corner waiting to enter into our minds is simply another fear that can become a major distraction for some people.

There are a number of studies of people who master their art and professions. The thing they generally have in common is the ability to focus all their attention on their art for long periods of time.

When we study what it means to be loved the idea of attention is very important. The two things that define love for most people is being seen and being heard. If one is engaged in the fear based focus on Satan being on the prowl the ability to love is severely hampered and the focus is on oneself.

This is why any belief system that focuses on fears tends to be self centered and reduces a person's ability to love and empathize. Fear also tends to keep a person immature.

In community, when people can really hear and see each other deep bonds form and life feels like it is meaningful. This provides the foundation for joy, our most sublime experience. Fear destroys all of this and most fears are based on illusions.

So if there is a Satan I would say it is simply fear.

It was pointed out to me that the Bible states perfect love casts out fear. To quote Tom Wetmore's answer, "That sort of confirms the framing of the great cosmic battle of God vs. Satan if God = love and perfect love casting out fear. In the end love wins. Fear loses the battle for the hearts and minds of the people."

This brings me back to the original question, "Why do we need god?" or "Why do we need to anthropomorphize the unknown?"

I think humans are afraid of the unknown so we tend to anthropomorphize these powerful influences on our experience. Love and fear are both powerful experiences that defy description because essentially they are both irrational.

In a way we project ourselves onto our gods so we can make the unknown more predictable. I think that is why god looks so much like an iron age ruler in the Bible because the Bible writers are projecting humanity onto their god. And it would make sense that humanity would make gods out of both love and fear. We hear the statement, "God IS love" enough times that it is part of many people's assumed reality. And Satan being seen behind every harmful and destructive aspect of society certainly embodies him as a representation of fear.

I think Carl Jung describes this well as our tendency to draw on archetypes to help explain the great collective consciousness. Joseph Campbell does a great job of tracing these archetypes among different religions and traditions in his books on mythology.

I see nothing wrong with exploring spiritual experience using anthropomorphic representations of these mysteries. And I think that is why freedom of religion is essential for a healthy society. What crosses the line into harmful is when these representations are sustained as being real through force, coercion, and fear. When this is done I think it reveals a religion's immaturity and self centeredness of its members. It also removes the benefit that comes from the archetype by reducing the archetype into something less than human.

So when fear is the core motivation, the god that is worshiped is no longer a "higher power", but is something with even its humanity removed.  Because, fear has no room for empathy.

Is Disagreement Religious Bigotry?

David Hayward at nakedpastor presented the following cartoon on his blog...



Often the discussion of ideas breaks down because the accusation of rudeness is used to imply that whatever the person being “rude” is saying is untrue. In my experience those who follow any of the three Abrahamic traditions generally expand rudeness to anything appearing to question the nature or existence of their god. Accusations of blaspheme tend to be brandished about in these situations.

When I was a believer I noted how easily I could be offended. It made me wonder how solid my idea of truth was if it was so vulnerable to criticism. I have noticed that if something is true, it doesn’t need to be defended. I simply came to the point where I couldn’t defend my Christian beliefs in any objective way. And on the subjective level I came to realize how many of my Christian beliefs were extremely destructive to my quality of life.

On a personal level the subjective is absolutely needed to make life full. Love, beauty, art, music, and whole host of inner experiences make life quite wonderful. So if one claims their belief brings them a sense of wonder and joy, there is no argument since the truth of their wonder is based solely on their interpretation of the experience. They are absolutely the arbiter of their own truth as far as how it affects their enjoyment of life.

Now its quite different when that person decides that since their subjective experience is wonderful then everyone has to have the same exact experience to feel wonderful and until the whole world has that experience, the universe will simply not be “right.” And this person decides that those who do not agree that this experience is the one and only true way, are in fact condemned to burn in hell forever. That is essentially what many Christians are doing. This has no basis in truth or fact and is simply untestable in any objective way what so ever and yet confident claims are made of its universal veracity. In addition I would guess most Christians don’t actually have an experience to reference, but are simply defending something they have been told is true.

Now I can be dishonest and tell you that I respect your belief, when in fact there is nothing believable about it to me, other than I can believe that it makes you happy. And even though Christians feel it is their duty to “love” me so much by telling me that my lack of belief makes me amoral and a evil influence on society, I can still appreciate the obvious joy something like “God loves me” can bring to a person.

When I look at Christianity’s track record of violence, manipulation, and oppression, I find no evidence that it should be the universal “truth” that the whole world needs to follow. I really can’t find any philosophy or religion that could fit that bill. I do know a number of methods for learning and adapting I could recommend.

The deal breaker for bridge building is the fact that every Abrahamic sourced religion believes that the whole world should be like them. Any bridge building done by them would be a lie. It would simply be a means to convert everyone to their idea of what is true. The type of bridge building implied by the cartoon can only be done when religious belief stays in the realm of subjective experience and communication is done for the motivation of curiosity and understanding.
Christians gives a lot of lip service to truth and yet becomes offended when someone who disagrees is completely honest. When someone is honest with me that information is very valuable. When someone simply tells me what I want to hear, that person doesn’t care about me, but sees me as a means to an end. And this happens too often in Christian communities as the latest “mission” project or “cause” defending Christian values sweeps through town.

We live in a weird world where large groups of people holding rigid views of god and truth are in a continual collision course, even among themselves. One simply needs to publish the right offensive cartoon, say a particular “liberal’ phrase, or accidently misunderstand a small point of a complex culture to ignite a holy outrage. This spawns leaders telling the group they need to fight for their truth and how the world is going to fall apart unless they give everything. They claim that they are the persecuted one’s even if they are the majority and that anyone who is against their beliefs is motivated by evil intents to destroy all that is good and wholesome. And the latest is that anyone who is against their religion is bigoted. I guess I should never under estimate the power of fear.

Ruling a nation God's way?

I like to dialog in many different settings. I have been participating in a couple of dialogs lately. In one particular dialog I have been talking about the basis of morality and ethics. For the most part it has been interesting. Sometimes, when a religious dialog gets to a point where there doesn't seem to be any common ground I will get a response like the one I received recently. I've included a link to the dialog at the request of Wes, who I was dialoging with. Wes is probably a really nice person. He has a nice looking family with three boys. There are some very nice pictures of his family on his blog and they look like fun people. Now I would like to contrast that with his response to my idea that ethics doesn't need God to order us to be good but can be based on doing no harm or that which causes pain. I even referred to Jesus who said to do unto others as you would have them do unto you, pointing out that even Jesus used a self-referenced ethical saying. Here is his response...

"BOTTOM LINE. You want to love your sin and the things you want to do then bend the knee to God. But unfortunately for you Richard if you don't bend the knee before you die you will be bending your knee in hell and praising Jesus Christ anyways."

For those of you who are not familiar with hell, it is a place created by God for sinners to be burned alive for all eternity. Now the picture that Wes presents here is one where not only am I burning alive, but I am forced down on my knees to sing praises to Jesus. I'm not perfect, but I have a hard time coming up with anything I could possibly do that would deserve this type of punishment for all eternity and still be considered just and loving. Its also hard to conceive of any possible motivation for a God who claims to value justice and love to maintain this sort of place for all eternity. What is disturbing is that this type of solution is considered to be moral and ethical behavior by God.

I do have some concerns about the possibility of people, who believe this way, taking over the justice system in the United States. As I have read about various Christian organizations and their goals to reform the justice system in this country I have wondered how far they really wanted to go.

There has been a resurgence of Calvinism in recent years among young Christians according to the blog Church Matters. While I doubt any of these young people would endorse many of the things that Calvin did, I think it might be important to observe how Calvin applied his beliefs.

From this article "John Calvin: His Life in Geneva" we find the following summary...

"(The following information can be found in the book CALVIN: A BIOGRAPHY, by Bernard Cottret, published by William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Grand Rapids, Michigan, copyright 2000. Page numbers are included for each entry.)

1. (page 128) 1536 - CALVIN PROPOSES "a confession of faith" for the Genevans

2. (page 128) November 10, 1536 - Confession of faith presented, entitled "Confession of Faith, which all bourgeois and inhabitants of Geneva and subjects in its territories should swear to keep to and hold." - This document granted the right of the government to excommunicate offenders and protect the innocent by chastising the guilty.

3. (page 128) January 16, 1537 - Geneva authorities approve the Confession of Faith and the separate articles PRESENTED BY CALVIN.

4. (page 129) 1537 - One provision of the Confession of Faith and its articles included that pious images kept in people's private homes must be destroyed.

5. (page 129) March 1537 - Anabaptists were banished. (Anabaptists were primarily defined by their rejection of infant baptism.)

6. (page129) April 1537 - At CALVIN'S INSTIGATION city officials including captains and district wardens were commanded to go from house to house to ensure that the inhabitants subscribe to the Confession of faith.

7. (page 129) October 30,1537 - There was a final attempt to obtain a confession of faith from all who had been hesitating.

8. (page 129) November 12, 1537 - District by district, all those who had not made the confession of faith were ordered to leave the city.

9. (page 180) February 1545 - "Freckles" Dunant dies under torture without admitting to the crime of spreading the plague. His body was then dragged to the middle of town and burned.

10. (page 180) 1545 - Following the incident with Dunant, several more men and women were apprehended including a barber and a hospital supervisor who had "made a pact with the devil."

11. (page 180) March 7, 1545 - Two women executed by burning at the stake (presumably for the crime of sorcery, i.e. spreading the plague). CALVIN INTERCEDED apparently to have them executed sooner rather than later after additional time in prison. The Council followed his directive happily and urged the executioner to "be more diligent in cutting off the hands of malefactors."

12. (page 180) 1545 - more executions, tortures carefully watched to prevent death. Most of the tortured refused to confess. Means of death varied a little to include decapitation. All under the crime of spreading the plague. Some committed suicide in their cells to avoid torture, afterward the rest were handcuffed. One woman then through herself through a window.

13. (page 208) 1545 - CALVIN HAD the magistrates seize Belot, an Anabaptist (against infant baptism) for stating that the Old Testament was abolished by the New. Belot was chained and tortured.

14. (page 180) May 16, 1545 - The last execution concerning the plague outbreak, bringing the total dead to 7 men and 24 women. A letter from CALVIN attests to 15 of these women being burned at the stake. CALVIN'S only concern was that the plague had not come to his house.

15. (page 189) April 1546 - Ami Perrin put on trial for refusing to testify against several friends who were guilty of having danced. She was incarcerated for refusal to testify.

16. (page 190) July 1546 - Jacques Gruet was accused of writing a poster against Calvin. He was arrested and tortured until he admitted to the crime. He was then executed.

17. (page 177) November 22, 1546 - CALVIN DRAWS up a list of names inappropriate for baptism (i.e. inappropriate for naming children). CALVIN'S position insisted that a name appear in the Bible, or it was inappropriate.

18. (page 217) February 13, 1547 - CALVIN WRITES to the man who would preside over the burning of Michael Servetus. In the letter CALVIN WRITES, "For if he [Michael Servetus] came, as far as my authority goes, I would not let him leave alive."

19. (page 189) Thursday, June 23, 1547 - Several women tried for having danced, this time including Ami Perrin.

20. (page 192) September 23, 1547 - Francois Favre was prosecuted for having said that Calvin had proclaimed himself bishop of Geneva. Favre, Perrin, and his wife were again imprisoned.

21. (page 184) September 27, 1548 - CALVIN REPORTS his brother's wife to the consistory on suspicion of adultery.

22. (page 184) October 16-18, 1548 - Anne, CALVIN'S SISTER-IN-LAW is freed and had to kneel and ask forgiveness from both her husband and CALVIN (for apparently damaging his reputation.)

23. (page 210) October, 1551 - Hierome Bolsec imprisoned for his opposition to predestination. There he was immediately interrogated.

24. (page 211) December 23, 1551 - Bolsec sentenced to banishment on penalty of public whipping if he returned.

25. (page 223) Spring, 1553 - Proofs against the heretic Michael Servetus were gathered in Geneva in CALVIN'S ENTOURAGE.

26. (page 223) April, 1553 - Catholics were provided the evidence. Servetus is interrogated but escapes.

27. (page 223) August 13, 1553 - Servetus arrives in Geneva and is arrested and imprisoned.

28. (page 223) September 15, 1553 - From prison, Servetus writes a letter to the Council complaining that Calvin was deliberately prolonging his stay in the worst prison conditions. He complains of being eaten alive by insects and having no suitable clean or mended clothes to wear. The official charges, 1) denial of the Trinity 2) rejection of infant baptism.

29. (page 223) October 27, 1553 - After refusing to confess, Servetus is burned alive at the stake. Calvin apparently tried to change the manner of death to something other than burning at the stake, but he was unsuccessful.

30. (page 198) February, 1555 - Elections favorable to Calvin.

31. (page 198) May 16, 1555 - A riot ensues after the elections. Perrin (a leader of the opposing faction) seized the baton, which symbolized the office of Syndic giving the appearance of a coup d'etat. Perrin flees along with his associate Philibert Berthelier.

32. (page 198) After May 16, 1555 - CALVIN CALLS for repression.

33. (page 198) Monday, June 3, 1555 - The guilty are judged in absentia. Perrin is condemned to have the hand of his right arm cut off (the hand with which he grabbed the baton.) He and his accomplices were condemned to decapitation, then the heads and Perrin's hand were to be nailed up in public and their bodies cut into four quarters. The brothers Comparet received the sentence of decapitation and their bodies are to be quartered. All who didn't flee were executed. Two other men, Claude Galloys and Girard Thomas were put in a sort of pillory in two different parts of town. Galloys also received the sentence of having to carry a torch and ask for mercy. Berthelier's brother Francois-Daniel is among the victims of the repression. CALVIN JUSTIFIES the severity of their sentences.

34. (page 253) March, 1556 - Those who broke measures barring the mixing of men and women were subjected to public humiliation in the collar (a sort of pillary).

35. (page 253) December 31, 1556 - Jacques Lampereur was imprisoned for having made strong statements against the edicts last proposed on fornications, saying that we are under the law of grace and that is would be judaizing to condemn adulterers to death.

36. (page 184) January, 1557 - CALVIN'S SISTER-IN-LAW was imprisoned again for having committed adultery.

37. (page 180-181) October, 1568 - A pair of men were executed for sorcery after CALVIN EXHORTED his contemporaries to pursue sorcerers in order to remove all of them from the earth.

38. (page 181) 1568 - Another sorcerer admits his guilt under the torture of having his feet burned. He later recants his admission and is banished forever from Geneva.

From this survey of the life of John Calvin, we find that 38 people were executed during his time in Geneva. Some were burned alive. Others were decapitated and quartered afterward. Most were tortured first. Many more were imprisoned and tortured. The great majority of these people were accused of sorcery for spreading the Plague. For at least two men, the crime was little more than a public denunciation of Calvin himself. And in cases such a Michael Servetus, Calvin's premeditated determination to kill was made readily apparent by a letter written six years before Servetus had ever been brought to trial."

I think it is important to remember the history of religious intolerance. Calvin would be considered mild compared to other Christian theocracies of the time. What is bordering on insanity is the application of these types of measures to insure a "good" society. This might bring some insight into why Christian culture finds sexual sins far more disturbing than violence. The other insanity is the ability of Christianity to condemn radical Islam without condemning its own radical history of violence.

A picture of a god who tortures people for all eternity in a most horrific way is obviously a myth made up by men to manipulate and control other people. What is puzzling, as in many understandings about the nature of humans, is the ability of such an insane belief to propagate itself over so many generations.

I can understand why a tyrant would want to use fear, absolute obedience, restriction of information, and the threat of violence to maintain control of a nation. What is baffling is why, in a country defined by freedom, we would want to worship one.

Source of Truth

As I begin the new year I have been meditating on what is the source of my truth. What I have been following is contained in my own life experiences. What I have found is that, while the experiences of other people are valuable, I really don't understand something fully, until I go there. When I dialog with people and they tell me their stories I certainly can observe the results of their individual experiences.

I just read an article in the latest Scientific American where some researchers have hooked up a device that measures brain wave activity on two people. The first person is doing a particular activity and the second is observing the activity. The interesting result is that their brain patterns are identical, possibly indicating that we can feel what another person feels through sharing an experience.

I have been exploring the idea that God is expressed, in part, by every person on the planet. So, the reasoning goes, the more people I can connect with the larger picture of God I can see. Obviously its much more complex than that, but it does provide me a picture that I can start with.

The other idea that came to mind was that as we become more skilled at expressing that piece of God we each have and we support each other in that expression, the greater manifestation of God. And if one believes that God is Love, the greater expression of love.

I'm sure this is not a new idea, but I've had more of an emotional connection with it lately and am interested in putting it into practice and see what becomes of it.