Archive for the ‘Religion – The Right Way’ Category

Pope Francis puts GOP in a corner on climate change

Saturday, June 20th, 2015

– I love this Pope.  The first one in my life that I can really stand up and applaud.  

– Bravo for sticking it to the GOP folks who wave their religion around like it is a justification for greed.  

– We need a better world, one that goes beyond power and greed as the prime movers, and that’s what the Pope is talking about. And, predictably, they are not going to like it.

– dennis

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

Conservative politicians have cited faith in shaping politics but are running from pope’s climate change teachings

WASHINGTON — Pope Francis is expected to take a provocative stance on global climate change Thursday, releasing an encyclical — a teaching letter addressed to Catholic bishops — that not only affirms the reality of man-made warming but issues a moral call for changes in lifestyle, consumption and policy to stave off environmental disaster.

That puts Republican lawmakers in the United States, many of whom outright deny that human activity has contributed to the warming of the earth, in an awkward position. Many of those conservative politicians, after all, have often cited their deeply held religious convictions as informing their political beliefs.

“I think it’s easy for Republicans to dismiss Greenpeace and other people who they see as tree-hugging leftists,” said John Gehring, the Catholic program director of Faith in Public Life, a religious advocacy group in Washington, D.C. “It’s much harder for them to brush off one of the greatest moral leaders of the world.”

Gehring said it is no surprise that the pope’s encyclical, emphasizing that climate change has a disproportionate impact on the poor, has rubbed certain conservative politicians the wrong way already.

“The pope is doing something that will make a lot of people very uncomfortable because he’s challenging a status quo that the richest and most powerful benefit from,” he added. “The Exxons of the world are not going to love this encyclical. The Koch brothers are not going to be sending it out as Christmas card. While the pope is a bridge builder, this is a provocative document that is meant to wake us up.”

Some prominent Republicans have already pre-emptively countered Francis’ message, arguing ahead of the official release of the encyclical that a religious leader has no place crafting public policy.

“I hope I’m not going to get castigated for saying this by my priest back home, but I don’t get economic policy from my bishops or my cardinals or my pope,” newly minted presidential candidate Jeb Bush said at a campaign stop in New Hampshire. “I think religion ought to be about making us better as people and less about things that end up getting in the political realm.”

Bush, who converted to Catholicism 20 years ago, has nevertheless taken a different view for most of his public life, speaking occasionally on how his faith has played a role in shaping his policy views. His religion is believed to have played a pivotal role in his decision as Florida governor to prolong the life of Terri Schiavo, a brain-dead woman embroiled in a right-to-die battle that gained national attention.

Rick Santorum, another 2016 presidential contender and a devout Catholic, has similarly said his faith informs his staunch opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage. But when asked about the pope wading into the climate change debate earlier this month by a radio host, Santorum answered, “The church has gotten it wrong a few times on science. I think that we are probably better off leaving science to the scientists and focusing on what we’re really good at, which is theology and morality.”

Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner, yet another prominent Catholic in politics, has thus far not weighed in on Francis’ encyclical. But earlier this year Boehner held the standard Republican line that climate change regulations kill U.S. jobs and that he would leave it to scientists to debate the facts.

Richard Cizik, a former top lobbyist for the National Association of Evangelicals who was castigated by Christian conservative activists after he became a believer in climate change science, was baffled by comments dismissing the pope from the realm of politics.

“It’s not only disdainful. It fails to appreciate political decisions are at heart moral decisions. They know that too,” he said. “It’s time for everyone to pause and reflect and not just respond politically to what the encyclical says but, first and foremost, personally.”

Bob Inglis, a former Republican South Carolina congressman, was voted out of office in 2010 shortly after making remarks regarding the need to address climate change. He believes the tension between Catholic teachings and Catholic politicians’ current positions can be a positive development for those hoping to break the partisan gridlock on the issue.

“There are a lot of Catholics who might have been critical of other Catholics who haven’t accepted the church’s teachings on abortion. They called them cafeteria Catholics,” said Inglis, now the executive director of RepublicEN, a group dedicated to conservative solutions for climate change. “Now the question is whether those same folks will become cafeteria Catholics and not accept the church’s teachings on climate change. The dissonance is going to be very constructive here. I hope what’s going to happen is that the encyclical is going to establish this as a moral question as well as a question of policy and economics.”

Other observers have noted the difficulty in defying hard political reality on climate change. The oil and gas industry, whose business interests lie in perpetuating the use of carbon-dioxide-releasing fossil fuels, contributed $18 million to congressional campaigns in the 2014 elections alone, the vast majority of that to Republican candidates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Climate change skeptics have continued to dig in on their positions. The Cornwall Alliance, a Christian conservative organization that claims climate change science is grossly exaggerated, said the arguments made in the encyclical are misguided.

“Pope Francis puts his moral authority as the leader of roughly 1.2 billion Catholics in jeopardy when he addresses technical scientific issues on which he has apparently only been given one side of what is a very vigorous scientific debate,” said Cornwall spokesman Calvin Beisner. “He will certainly have an influence on public opinion about this … I think he’s mistaken.”

Nonetheless, Cizik said, if people of faith across the country unite on the issue, Congress will ultimately follow.

“When faith communities unite, politicians listen,” he said. “It just seems to me now is an opportunity for those who have been wanting to make a change to come forward and boldly say so. People sometimes need a conversion. If you’re not going to change your mind every once in a while, you might as well be dead.”

Losing my religion for equality

Thursday, April 9th, 2015

– Most excellent article by, arguably, the most sincere and honest president during my lifetime.   Too bad that the American electorate did’t think he had the right stuff but then they seem drawn to ‘strong leaders with easy to grasp sound-bite answers’ – much to the detriment of the country and the world.

– Bravo, Jimmy Carter!

– dennis

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Women and girls have been discriminated against for too long in a twisted interpretation of the word of God.

I HAVE been a practising Christian all my life and a deacon and Bible teacher for many years. My faith is a source of strength and comfort to me, as religious beliefs are to hundreds of millions of people around the world. So my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when the convention’s leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.

This view that women are somehow inferior to men is not restricted to one religion or belief. Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths. Nor, tragically, does its influence stop at the walls of the church, mosque, synagogue or temple. This discrimination, unjustifiably attributed to a Higher Authority, has provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women’s equal rights across the world for centuries.

At its most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities.

The impact of these religious beliefs touches every aspect of our lives. They help explain why in many countries boys are educated before girls; why girls are told when and whom they must marry; and why many face enormous and unacceptable risks in pregnancy and childbirth because their basic health needs are not met.

In some Islamic nations, women are restricted in their movements, punished for permitting the exposure of an arm or ankle, deprived of education, prohibited from driving a car or competing with men for a job. If a woman is raped, she is often most severely punished as the guilty party in the crime.

The same discriminatory thinking lies behind the continuing gender gap in pay and why there are still so few women in office in the West. The root of this prejudice lies deep in our histories, but its impact is felt every day. It is not women and girls alone who suffer. It damages all of us. The evidence shows that investing in women and girls delivers major benefits for society. An educated woman has healthier children. She is more likely to send them to school. She earns more and invests what she earns in her family.

It is simply self-defeating for any community to discriminate against half its population. We need to challenge these self-serving and outdated attitudes and practices – as we are seeing in Iran where women are at the forefront of the battle for democracy and freedom.

I understand, however, why many political leaders can be reluctant about stepping into this minefield. Religion, and tradition, are powerful and sensitive areas to challenge. But my fellow Elders and I, who come from many faiths and backgrounds, no longer need to worry about winning votes or avoiding controversy – and we are deeply committed to challenging injustice wherever we see it.

The Elders are an independent group of eminent global leaders, brought together by former South African president Nelson Mandela, who offer their influence and experience to support peace building, help address major causes of human suffering and promote the shared interests of humanity. We have decided to draw particular attention to the responsibility of religious and traditional leaders in ensuring equality and human rights and have recently published a statement that declares: “The justification of discrimination against women and girls on grounds of religion or tradition, as if it were prescribed by a Higher Authority, is unacceptable.”

We are calling on all leaders to challenge and change the harmful teachings and practices, no matter how ingrained, which justify discrimination against women. We ask, in particular, that leaders of all religions have the courage to acknowledge and emphasise the positive messages of dignity and equality that all the world’s major faiths share.

The carefully selected verses found in the Holy Scriptures to justify the superiority of men owe more to time and place – and the determination of male leaders to hold onto their influence – than eternal truths. Similar biblical excerpts could be found to support the approval of slavery and the timid acquiescence to oppressive rulers.

I am also familiar with vivid descriptions in the same Scriptures in which women are revered as pre-eminent leaders. During the years of the early Christian church women served as deacons, priests, bishops, apostles, teachers and prophets. It wasn’t until the fourth century that dominant Christian leaders, all men, twisted and distorted Holy Scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy.

The truth is that male religious leaders have had – and still have – an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter. Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world. This is in clear violation not just of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but also the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul, Moses and the prophets, Muhammad, and founders of other great religions – all of whom have called for proper and equitable treatment of all the children of God. It is time we had the courage to challenge these views.

– Jimmy Carter was president of the United States from 1977 to 1981.

– To the original article:  

 

Why Scandinavian women make the rest of the world jealous

Monday, November 18th, 2013

Icelanders are among the happiest and healthiestpeople on Earth. They publish more books per capita than any other country, and they havemore artists. They boast the most prevalent belief in evolution — and elves, too. Iceland is the world’s most peaceful nation (the cops don’t even carry guns), and the best place for kids. Oh, and they had a lesbian head of state, the world’s first. Granted, the national dish is putrefied shark meat, but you can’t have everything.

Iceland is also the best place to have a uterus, according to the folks at the World Economic Forum. The Global Gender Gap Report ranks countries based on where women have the most equal access to education and healthcare, and where they can participate most fully in the country’s political and economic life.

According to the 2013 report, Icelandic women pretty much have it all. Their sisters in Finland, Norway, and Sweden have it pretty good, too: those countries came in second, third and fourth, respectively. Denmark is not far behind at number seven.

The U.S. comes in at a dismal 23rd, which is a notch down from last year. At least we’re not Yemen, which is dead last out of 136 countries.

So how did a string of countries settled by Vikings become leaders in gender enlightenment? Bloodthirsty raiding parties don’t exactly sound like models of egalitarianism, and the early days weren’t pretty. Medieval Icelandic law prohibited women from bearing arms or even having short hair. Viking women could not be chiefs or judges, and they had to remain silent in assemblies. On the flip side, they could request a divorce and inherit property. But that’s not quite a blueprint for the world’s premier egalitarian society.

The change came with literacy, for one thing. Today almost everybody in Scandinavia can read, a legacy of the Reformation and early Christian missionaries, who were interested in teaching all citizens to read the Bible. Following a long period of turmoil, Nordic states also turned to literacy as a stabilizing force in the late 18th century. By 1842, Sweden had made education compulsory for both boys and girls.

Researchers have found that the more literate the society in general, the more egalitarian it is likely to be, and vice versa. But the literacy rate is very high in the U.S., too, so there must be something else going on in Scandinavia. Turns out that a whole smorgasbord of ingredients makes gender equality a high priority in Nordic countries.

– More:

 

Unitarian Universalists

Thursday, March 25th, 2010

– I don’t publish much that I tag as “Religion – The Right Way” but this piece will be one of those.

– I’ve attended the Unitarian Universalist Church a few times in my life and liked what I saw there.  Most recently, I’ve gone to services here in Christchurch, New Zealand.

– The most recent time I attended, a paper written by a man named Peter Ferguson was read out and I really liked what was said.  I asked for a copy and I’ve republished it here in its entirety.

– Conventional religions, for the most part, leave me cold.  But this paper and what it expresses is, for me, of a higher quality.  It’s worth reading and thinking about both as a statement of principles and as an historical analysis.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The Iron Bed of Procrustes

The Sacred Heresies of Unitarianism against the Iron Bed of Christian Orthodoxy
Peter Ferguson, 4 October 2009

Procrustes, the son of the sea god Poseidon, is a figure from Greek mythology.  His stronghold was in the mountains.  There he would offer travellers his hospitality, telling them about his magic bed that would adjust exactly to the size of the person who slept in it – no matter how tall or short.  Once inside, however, Procrustes would force them onto the bed and make them fit it.  If the guest was too tall, the legs would be amputated; if the victim was too short, he would stretch them out to fit.  The Iron Bed of Procrustes has become a symbol of enforced conformity.  The doctrine of conformity is central to the belief systems of both Christianity and Islam with the notable exception of Unitarianism.

Firstly, we shall look at the Procrustean demands of Christian orthodoxy which has its own iron beds in which all members have to fit.

Chances are that most of us are with the Unitarians because we couldn’t fit into the iron beds of the orthodox mainstream. We found Unitarianism a more attractive alternative where you are encouraged to form your own views about life.  For example, to be an Anglican, a Catholic or a Baptist, you need to believe in the Trinity: That there is God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.  The Father sent his Son who had existed with him and the Holy Spirit from all eternity to planet Earth to be born of a virgin, to live a perfect life, die a sacrificial death, rise again two days later and ascend into heaven.

The Athanasian Creed remains in the very latest Anglican prayer book as the statement of faith, proclaiming that those who don’t believe in the Trinity will suffer punishment “in everlasting fire”.  The Roman Catholic Church has given its followers even more impossible things that you have to believe in before breakfast every day: such as the infallibility of the Pope, and the bodily assumption to heaven of Jesus’ mother, Mary.  If you disagree with the cardinal dogmas of the mainstream churches you will be labeled a heretic.   The word heretic comes from the Greek “haeresis” meaning one who chooses.

Countless are the men and women who have been punished, banished and sometimes executed for not believing in the Three Person Godhead.

Peter Ferguson currently serves as president of ANZUUA.  When he left the Anglican Church about ten years ago, his Archbishop wrote him a very nice letter thanking him for his contributions over the previous 40 years.  Then came the sting in the tail of the Archbishop’s letter.  He stated that if Peter abandoned his Unitarian belief, he would be welcome back in the Trinitarian fold.

For us heresy is sacred:  choosing for ourselves is all about our rights as human beings.  The mainstream churches regard Unitarianism as a cult.  As proof of this Unitarian churches have consistently been denied membership to the World Council of Churches and their affiliated bodies around the world.  A cult is a system of religious beliefs that replaces your beliefs with its own.  A cult is a religious movement that gives legitimacy only to its own teachings.  If you cannot or do not conform you are excluded.  By this definition all the mainstream churches are cults: the Roman Catholic Church being the largest and most successful of them all.  Each member has to conform and fit the denominational bed.

Secondly, we shall look at how all this came to be.  To do this we need to have a look at the origins of Christianity.  What follows is a very condensed overview of  the history of the Early Church.

After the death of Jesus, his brother, James, became the leader of the group who had been Jesus’ followers.  There are four clear references to James after Jesus’ death :

a) The Jewish historian Josephus, describing his sadness at the execution of James at the hands of the Sadducees in the year 62 CE, refers to James,  as “the brother of Jesus called the Christ”.

b) In his letter to the Galatians 1:20, Paul, having visited Jerusalem, wrote “I only saw James, the brother of the Lord.”

c) In the Gospel of Mark 6:3 “This is the carpenter, surely, the son of Mary, the brother of James and Joses and Jude and Simon ?  His sisters, too, are they not with us.”

d) The letter of James bears a striking similarity to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount as it stresses the importance of Jesus’ ethical teaching rather than Paul’s Christ of faith. “My brothers!  What good is it for a man to say, ‘I have faith’ if his actions do not prove it? Can that faith save him?  Suppose there are brothers or sisters who need clothes and don’t have enough to eat.  What good is there in your saying to them, ‘God bless you!  Keep warm and eat well!” – if you don’t give them the necessities of life ?  This is how it is with faith: if it is alone and has no actions with it, then it is dead.  James 2:14-17.

After the death of Jesus, James and the original followers of Jesus continued to live in Jerusalem, still worshipping within the Temple and observing Judaism.  In time they became known as the Ebionites, the Poor Ones.  From the Book of the Acts, we read, “The many miracles and signs worked through the Apostles made a deep impression on everyone.  The faithful all lived together and owned everything in common; they sold their goods and possessions and shared out the proceeds among themselves according to what each one needed.  They went as a body to the Temple every day but met in their houses for the breaking of bread: they shared their food gladly and generously; they praised God and were looked up to by everyone.”  Very soon, however, the situation was to change and within a few short years the belief that Jesus had risen from the dead spread rapidly and gained followers from across the Roman Empire: proof of this being Nero’s blaming the Christians for the great fire of Rome in 64CE.

Paul arrived on the scene after a dramatic visionary encounter with Jesus on the Damascus Road.  He soon redefined the life and person of Jesus.  It is interesting to note that Paul came from Tarsus which was a centre for the worship of Heracles.  The similarities of Paul’s Christ and the Greek demigod are truly amazing.  Heracles was the son of Zeus and the virgin, Alcmene.  He was of royal lineage and destined to rule the world.  He gathered around him followers and performed extraordinary feats and miracles.  He suffered a cruel death and descended into the underworld.  He rose again and ascended into heaven.  His disciples looked forward to his return in glory.

Many scholars believe that Paul’s Christ was a product and amalgam of various figures from Greek mythology including Mithras, Dionysus and Isis.  Paul saw Jesus’ death as part of a divine plan and referred to Jesus as Jesus Christ as if Christ was his surname.  Paul made it easy for his converts to become Christians and permitted them to discard practices such as circumcision and eating of pork and other unclean animals even though during the Maccabean wars thousands of Jews died to defend those two particular laws of the Torah.  Time does not permit us to go deeper.  Suffice to state that Paul was engaged in bitter rows with the original Jewish disciples for the rest of his life.

For its first 300 years the Church was anything but a monolithic unity.  The proliferation of Christian groups was a mind blowing phenomenon in the first three centuries.  The proto-orthodox Paulinist Catholic Church was the largest.  The Ebionites rejected the virgin birth and the pre-existence of Jesus and stressed the humanity of Jesus and the essential oneness of God.  The Docetists believed that Jesus was a heavenly being.  The Montanists practiced speaking in tongues.  Marcionites appointed women as bishops and priests.  Carpocratians enjoyed good food and wine and taught that Jesus had a normal parentage.

They endured several severe persecutions from various Roman emperors till the early years of the 4th century.  In 312, on the eve of battle, the Emperor Constantine had a dream that was to change the course of history forever.  He saw a sign in the sky with the words “Hoc signo victor eris” which translates as “By this sign you shall be the victor”.  He saw it as a good omen and he gave orders that this Christian sign, the letters “Chi Rho”, be painted on every soldier’s shield.

Constantine’s army triumphed at the battle of the Milvian Bridge and thus captured Rome and became sole emperor.   Constantine immediately introduced religious toleration to all the religions of the Empire but gave special favours to the Christians.

In a shrewd move motivated by politics and military strategy, Constantine then called a meeting of the various Christian leaders in his Empire.  Contrary to common belief the Christians at that time had no centralized leadership.  There was no one Pope ruling the Christian world.  A meeting took place in Nicaea, modern day Turkey, where Constantine had his palace.  Delegates came from every part of the Empire.  One of the main purposes of the gathering was to decide whether Jesus had been God from all eternity or simply a divine being.  Constantine, who was not a Christian, presided over the Council and ruled in favour of those who believed that Jesus Christ was of one substance with the Father – God the Son.

Those who refused to consent were banished.  The rest of the delegates were invited to stay on and attend Constantine’s 20th anniversary celebrations.  Several of the signatories wrote to Constantine afterwards.  Eusebius of Nicomedia wrote to Constantine stating, “We committed an impious act, O Prince, by subscribing to a blasphemy for fear of you.”  But it was too late and there was no turning back on the decisions of the Council of Nicaea.

Jesus, the Jewish teacher, had been declared truly God from all eternity.

For Constantine, it was probably a matter of no great importance: after all he had his own father, Constantius, deified.  He, himself, would be deified after his death.  Was Constantine a true follower of Jesus?  Judge for yourself.  A year after Nicaea, Constantine ordered the execution of his son, and then instructed that his wife be boiled alive while taking a bath – surely a far cry from the teachings of the carpenter from Nazareth.  Constantine, however, was baptized on his deathbed to ensure that all his sins would be forgiven and that he would gain immediate entrance into heaven!

It proved to be a conclusive victory for the Paulinist proto-orthodox party and to this day the Nicene Creed remains the central doctrine of the Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant churches.

Within a hundred years of so after Nicaea the many varieties of Christianity had been consigned to the rubbish bin of history.  Gone were the Ebionites, the Gnostics, the Carpocratians – the whole lot !  The Church closed down the centres of Greek philosophy – the famous schools of Plato, the Aristotelians, the Stoics, the Skeptics, the Epicurians and the Hedonists – all gone !  The temples of the pagan gods and goddesses of the mystery religions, Isis, Mithras, Venus were all rooted out of existence by the triumphant Constantinian Trinitarian Church.  The dark ages of Procrustean conformity lasted for more than a thousand years.

The now dominant Catholic Church supported by the power of the Roman State promptly set about imposing its doctrines upon the citizens of the Empire.  The Jewish communities were one of the first targets.  Heavy penalties were imposed upon anyone who converted to Judaism.  Mixed marriages were punished by death.  In the next century their synagogues were confiscated and converted into churches.  Forced expulsions, pogroms and other atrocities were leveled at the Jewish communities throughout the years and culminated in the Holocaust.

The Church came down heavily on any deviation from the teachings of the Roman hierarchy.  The tri-theistic doctrine of the Trinity was not seriously challenged until the Enlightenment and Renaissance.

Now for the story of Michael Servetus who was born Miguel Serveto on St Michael’s Day 29 September 1511 in Aragon in north east Spain.  A child prodigy by the age of 13 he could read French, Greek, Latin and most significantly Hebrew which was considered dangerous and subversive by the church.  For Servetus, the Trinity was a contrived teaching and Christianity could never be purified until it was stripped away.  As long as the Trinity was its central teaching, any outreach to the Jews and Muslims who were monotheists would be futile.  He had a dream of the Christian Jews and Muslims being as it were “under one umbrella”.

He decided to write a book “On the Errors of the Trinity”.  He was a teenager 19 years old at the time.  The book was a sell-out – 1000 copies sold immediately and it became a best seller.  However, he had become a marked man both to the Inquisition and the Protestant reformers.  Like Salmon Rushdie, Servetus was soon to discover that underestimating one’s religious opponents can be very dangerous.  He was sentenced to death in absentia by the Spanish Inquisition.

Not only the Catholics but the Protestant reformer Calvin were now equally furious.  Servetus wisely changed his name and identity and studied in mathematics and medicine at the University of Paris under the name of Michael Villeneuve.  A brilliant mind he described the pulmonary system of the blood 75 years before the British physician, William Harvey, made the same observation.  Harvey was accredited with the discovery but actually it had been Michael Servetus.

In 1553 his cover as Dr Villeneuve was blown and he fled from the Inquisition to Geneva, ruled over by Calvin, arriving there on Saturday 12 August staying at a safe place in the Inn of the Rose.  The following day he attended church and was recognized and arrested and thrown into a lice-infested cell.  At his trial Servetus bravely defended his belief in the absolute unity of God.

The obedient lackeys of Calvin were unanimous in their condemnation of him.  And so on 27 October 1553 at the age of 42 Michael Servetus was led to the stake, an iron chain wrapped around his torso and a thick rope wound several times about his neck.  A crown of thorns and leaves filled with sulphur was placed upon his head, and his book “The Errors of the Trinity” were lashed to his arm.  Green wood was placed around the stake to ensure his death would be slow.  The fire was lit.  It took him half an hour to die.  He did not break down and was heard to say, “Oh, Jesus, son of the Eternal God, have pity on me.”  So even in death he had remained true to his faith otherwise he would have said, “Oh Jesus eternal Son of God …”

Thirdly, we look at the history of the defamation and suppression of women by the Church. It has its roots in the New Testament.

In 1 Timothy 2:11, we read “Let a woman learn in silence with complete submission.  I permit no woman to teach or have authority over a man.  She is to keep silent for Adam was created first then Eve.  And Adam was not deceived but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.  Yet she shall be saved through childbearing.”  Saint Jerome (c. 347 – 420) who was responsible for the Latin translation of the Bible, described women in these words, “… the gate of the devil, the way of evil, the sting of the scorpion, in a word, a  very dangerous thing.”  Much later St Thomas Aquinas (c.1225-1274) described woman as a “failed man”.  “Woman was created to help man but only in procreation.  She should not be permitted any equality in the Church or civil society.”

The suppression of women reached a horrifying climax in the witch hunts which resulted in several million women being tortured and tens of thousands being burnt at the stake from the 13th to the 18th century.  Martin Luther (1483-1546) claimed that the man was the lord and master of his wife and had the right to beat her.  “If they become tired or even die, that does not matter.  Let them die in childbirth – that is why they are there.”

As we enter the 21st century women are still being debarred from ordination in about 90% of Christendom.  Recently the Pope placed a ban on any discussion about the ordination of women to the Catholic priesthood.  Conservative Christians, Catholic and Protestant also oppose pro-choice legislation and a woman’s right to have control over her own body.  Both Islamists and the Catholic Church ban the use of contraception in a world where over-population is a major issue.

There is an astonishing similarity between conservative Christians and Islamists and the fact that they share the same detestation for liberal values.  One of the reasons why ayatollahs and imams from around the world have called upon their followers to wage jihad was because the liberal and permissive values of the USA and the West were seen as a threat to Islam and undermining the faith that was brought to them through the prophet Mohammed.  These are some of the things that both Islamists and conservative Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, abhor :

– the emphasis on individual freedoms
– the laws that have given women equal rights in our society
– liberated women and all that symbolizes them.
– the fact that women should have the right to decide whether they will have children.
– homosexuality and gay and lesbian lifestyles

Both groups claim for their authority the infallible Word of God – the Bible or the Koran.

Summing up, as we reflect on the religious practices and beliefs of our own times, scholars have noted the fact that conservative Christians and Islamists share the same prejudices.  Scholars are beginning to understand that nearly all of the leaders of these groups are alpha males who are simply defining the boundaries of their territories.  These are perfectly normal and natural behaviours which they share with all sexually territorial animals.  The males set and enforce the rules, the females obey the rules and raise the children.

When the Pope or the Aytollah state that they are simply following the word of God or Allah, they are actually seriously underestimating the weight of their position.  The real authority behind this way of behaviour is millions of years older than all the religions and all the concocted gods and goddesses that there has ever been.

This form of behaviour, however, is completely unsuited for the world that we now live in.  It’s the recipe for destruction.  It was fine when we first came out of the trees, walked on two legs and lived in small groups.  In our contemporary world natural alpha male behaviour is incapable of the flexibility needed to structure human societies in a humane way.  It is too small to do justice to the complexities of the 21st century.

The iron bed of alpha male orthodoxy is not a comfortable resting place for free thinkers and those who think outside the square.  We are fortunate to be living in an age when we are no longer forced to believe irrational ideas.  It’s much better to be a free spirit.

We are mortal and we don’t know if anything awaits us after death and so we should see life as a wonderful source of joy as we live each moment.  At the same time we serve humanity and dream of trying to make the world a better place for ourselves and others including those who are not human.  The ideal of our faith community is to provide an atmosphere of freedom.  We are at our very best when we provide an environment where it is safe to voice one’s beliefs whether religious, moral, social or political.  One is not made to feel a second class person or a candidate for hell and damnation if one’s views and ideas are not mainstream.

We freely admit that we don’t have the answers or even the right questions to all of life’s problems.   Our vocation is to live ethically, to show true concern for those around us,  keeping in mind always the fact of the transience of our own lives, and our friends and loved ones.  We should practice kindness.

As free thinkers we are the final arbiters of what is good and evil.  Sam Harris puts it very well,

“The only angels we need to invoke are those of our better nature: reason, honesty and love.  The only demons we must fear are those that lurk inside every human mind: ignorance, greed, and blind faith which is surely the devil’s masterpiece.”

– My thanks to John A. of the Unitarian Universalists of Christchurch, New Zealand for both reading out this paper and for sharing a copy with me.

‘Let go and let Love’…. why did no-one tell me it’s so simple?

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

– It’s odd how one thing leads you to another.  John Micheal Greer over on The Archdruid Report mentioned in a post, as an aside, that one of his pet peeves was that people frequently misspelled Mathatma Gandhi’s name as Ghandi.

– This lead me to scan this Blog for such misspellings and, indeed, I found and corrected several.

– One of the misspellings was associated with a post I’d made back in February of 2007 referring to a beautiful post over on Life 2.0 entitled,

‘Let go and let Love’…. why did no-one tell me it’s so simple?

– As I made my correction, I began to reread the ‘Let go and let Love…’ post and was deeply captivated again by it.   So much so, that I want to re-post it here in it’s entirety.  It’s a very beautiful and timely piece and I encourage you, if you like it to visit Life 2.0 and explore for more of the same.

= = = = = = = = = = = * * * * * = = = = = = = = = = =

First up, an explanation of sorts.  There’s been a continued ‘enlightenment’ theme to recent posts.  Maybe it’s because I try not to plan what I write that posts here tend to follow a path of their own, I don’t really know.  All I can say is that I have a load of ideas around entrepreneurship, creativity and life hacks that I’d love to share with you too.  But whilst we’re still on this subject, and just so you have a little perspective as to ‘where I’m coming from’, I’ll tell you about my own journey so far:

I guess we all come to the recognition of Truth in our own way and in our own time,  and that’s good.  My way seems very strange though.  I was one of the so called lucky ones – I had my very own ‘burning bush’ experience.. but what I did with that beggars belief.  I very, very subtly (so that I wouldn’t even notice I was doing it) turned and walked away from it.
.
The burning bush
Some years ago, after a lifetime of being determined to find out ‘how things really worked’, and having studying  A Course in Miracles for a year or so, I was out walking my Labrador on the hill behind my home.  After I had gotten tired of throwing sticks for Ben I sat down on a stile to watch the world go by for a while, and the dog curled up under my feet. In the next few minutes I came to see my whole life in a completely new light, totally reframed and everything fitting perfectly together – like adding the last few lines to a ‘join the dots’ picture where suddenly you see what it is all about for the very first time.  I thought I had been building businesses, raising my children, trying to be all the things I wanted to be.  I had no idea that totally unbeknown to me, life had had a completely different agenda.

This ‘secret’ agenda had been working through everything I had ever thought, spoken and done, through every so called failure and success and through every traumatic or blissful moment in my life.  I saw so clearly that everything that had happened since the day I popped onto this planet had been orchestrated to bring me to this place where I was now sat and was able to see the perfection and beauty of it all.  It all was suddenly so clear, every single part of my life fitted together faultlessly, with not one piece missing or to spare.  Enlightenment had been going on all the time…. perfectly.

Here’s what I now knew:  After all my efforts to understand, to ‘get it’ and then to walk the path, the path has been walking through me all along.  We had always been the vehicle for enlightenment, we just didn’t see ourselves as doing that, and certainly didn’t see ourselves as being in the driving seat.  There was one beautiful purpose to life and my expression of that had been played perfectly by me all along, and this was true for everyone.  Suddenly all concept of right and wrong and guilt and doubt disappeared completely.  And there was no place for  regrets anymore, only this one vast, all encompassing Love….. and it had only been my desire to find happiness in this life that had blinded me to seeing it was already here.
.
Good intentions gone wrong
I knew from that moment on that my life was changed because there could be no forgetting this.  By some form of grace I had glimpsed Reality and all I wanted or needed to do was find a way of helping the rest of the world see the same thing. And that’s where I started to lose the plot again.

The more I tried to explain this, to myself or others, the more distant it seemed to become.  All I wanted do was to help and yet the more I tried, the more this epiphany turned into a distant memory.  What I didn’t see then was that the very act of trying to understand was the act of denial of what I had so clearly seen.  By trying to understand I was separating the one who was trying to understand from that which he was trying to understand.  By attempting to reconcile God and Life and Love and Enlightenment and ‘Who I am’, I was denying that they are all the same thing….. this Oneness that I had been so fortunate to experience.

It’s only when I imagine there is more than one thing, like when I put the little word ‘my’ in front of the word ‘life’, that there arises the concept of an under-stander and an under-stood and then the need to understand.  Oneness can only ever be experiential because it is all inclusive.  Reality can only be known, because there is no-one separate to understand it. It’s only the mind that obfuscates this feeling of Love and connection that we already exists in.  And anything I can imagine to do to come to this realisation, can also only be part of my denial of this feeling of Love that is constantly trying to seep into our conscious awareness.  As Thomas Aquinas one said:

Love takes up where knowledge leaves off.”

Awakening was life’s role not mine.  I had forgotten that our part is only to allow it to happen.
.
Wising up
So little by little I’ve come to accept there is nothing I can do to awaken because life itself is the process of awakening.  It’s a process of accepting what already is and that requires no doing and no effort, just a surrender to what is already here in this moment.  Life delights to set us free, to make us happy.. and everything we need to fulfill that purpose comes to us, perfectly.  When we really accept that we don’t know how to wake up then a miracle happens.  Instead of not-knowing being the problem, not-knowing becomes the answer – our whole way, because ‘not-knowing’ is the clean and empty slate on which Love will write a different story through our lives.  It is in the invitation and the opening to grace.

I suppose we could paraphrase the whole process of life down to this one thing:  A process of letting go of our resistance (in a multitude of ways) to the Love that Is.  This is all that is really going on here.  And so we come home to Truth, to the knowing of our true Self, simply by allowing it to happen – by allowing ourselves to become non-resistant to everything.

At the end of the day the choice is this:- we can either be true to Truth of our own experience or true to the latest idea of what is still needed.  This is seen so clearly in the way the great religions keep us in chains by lowering expectations and by promising freedom some time in the ‘future’.  And so we end up settling for being Christians instead of Christs and Buddhists instead of Buddhas.  Didn’t Jesus once say, “Greater things than these things shall ye do”.  Adyanshanti says it well in this essay entitled  ‘You are the Buddha’.

This is what the Buddha did.  He didn’t say, “I’ll try.”  He didn’t say, “I hope I’ll find the Truth.”  He didn’t say, “I’ll do my best.”  He didn’t say, “If not in this lifetime, then maybe next lifetime.”  He came to the point where he didn’t look for anyone else to tell him the Truth or show him the Truth.  He came to the point where he took it all on himself.  He sat alone under the Bodhi Tree and vowed never to give up until the Truth be realized.

The power of this very simple, yet unshakable intention and absolute stand to be liberated in this lifetime propelled him to awaken to the simple fact that he and all beings are liberated—that all beings are freedom itself.  Pure awakeness.

The Buddha was no different from you.  No different. …..

Adyanshanti also says “What we serve we cannot lose”.  True enough, but even this idea of ‘serving Truth’, at least for a  bear-of-little-brain like me, is too much.  I have seen that we already do this and I have seen that in spite of appearances, everything we have ever done has served Truth.  We were just mistaken, and thought there was something else going on here.  And so when I attempt to serve Truth there is this very human tendency that arises in me to judge how I am doing, and then I lose my way again – lose sight of the fact that we already do this perfectly – that we are already awake and perfectly creative, and just don’t see it yet.
.
Homeward bound

So for me at least, I need to finally let go of trying to live it, of trying to serve it, and simply  allow It to live and serve through me – become nonresistant (‘surrender’ if you like) to this Love that we call life that already flows through us.

There’s a huge freedom in this tiny change of intent because now there is no cause for stress or concern.  When we replaces all the reasons ‘why’ we do things (especially all those spiritual or do-goody reasons) for this single ‘why’ of allowing Truth/Love/Life/Joy/*your own term here* to express itself through me, then there are no worries any more.  Life makes no mistakes….. ‘mistakes’, ‘problems’ – that’s all mind stuff.  Success in this is always certain, but now we come to  know it is so.

So perhaps I finally am ‘getting it’:  Just surrender to life…..let life flow through me un-resisted…. and see what happens.  ‘Listen and allow’…. as my friend  Jodee Bock tells me to do.

What a release not to have to do or understand anything anymore …. just enjoy the ride.  No worries, no cares, it’s not up to me now… not my problem.  And what problems could there be once their cause, my resistance, has gone.  Trusting instead, that when we are just being who we Are, in harmony with Universe, everything just works out fine.

Love Is…. what more could we do than simply let it be?

To let go and let Love……Why did no-one tell me it’s this simple?

Or perhaps they did and I just wasn’t ready to hear. 😉
.
Life as celebration
So what to do, now that I know that anything I try to do to bring about enlightenment blinds me to the recognition that it’s already here?

How about just doing whatever it that makes us happy and trust life to take care of all the rest?  Hard as it is to shatter the egos belief in unworthiness and sacrifice and struggle, it’s only in the path of our happiness that we find what we have come here to learn.  Life has only one agenda: –  that we be happy, now.

And what better way to strengthen this realisation than to see it everywhere, take joy in everything that comes our way and share it freely?  It’s this what we came for.

So to me, our greatest role models and teachers are not the obvious ones.  Not the ones that lecture or hold retreats, but those who know how to squeeze the juice out of life and then invite you to dine with them.

Evelyn at  Crossroad Dispatches and Tittin at  Backtracking Slowly Forward spring immediately to mind.  Click over there and you’ll find a pot-pourri of art, raw life and insight……. and you’ll perhaps also discover what  George Bernard Shaw meant when he said,  “The man who writes about himself and his own time is the only man who writes about all people and all time.” (we can forgive him the gender bias of those times).  But like any good feast, the best times to go there are when you are little hungry and when you have a little more time than you need… so you can savour and enjoy all the different flavours.

– To the original post on Life 2.0

Happiness is for All Time, Not Just the Future

Friday, November 28th, 2008

We get told to work hard for future happiness. When does this future happiness arrive? People work hard their whole lives, saving, so that they can have a good retirement. When we retire is when we’re meant to be relaxed and happy. This is the wool being pulled over our eyes. I feel that as a society, we’ve been brain washed to work, instead of enjoying our lives.

That’s what I’m talkin’ aboutWhen we’re old enough to retire, often we’re too old to enjoy ourselves. We’ve spent the prime of our lives suffering away, waiting for this magical day, and when it arrives we can’t fully enjoy it. Who wants to be too old to enjoy their life? Why should we wait until we’re past our peak to enjoy ourselves?Don’t put off your happiness. Live it. The only way to get to the future is through the present. It’s your actions now, your happiness now that dictates your future happiness. Even if we can justify short term hardwork, we have to be careful. By putting off happiness we increase suffering, as well as moving karma (habits) into a pattern of accepted suffering. People who work hard for a few months, when they get to the ‘other side’ often find themselves either bored/lacking or lonely. When they stop suffering, they often chose it again. It makes them feeling important.

More…

Southern Baptists Back a Shift on Climate Change

Friday, March 14th, 2008

Signaling a significant departure from the Southern Baptist Convention’s official stance on global warming, 44 Southern Baptist leaders have decided to back a declaration calling for more action on climate change, saying its previous position on the issue was “too timid.”

The largest denomination in the United States after the Roman Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, with more than 16 million members, is politically and theologically conservative.

Yet its current president, the Rev. Frank Page, signed the initiative, “A Southern Baptist Declaration on the Environment and Climate Change.” Two past presidents of the convention, the Rev. Jack Graham and the Rev. James Merritt, also signed.

“We believe our current denominational engagement with these issues has often been too timid, failing to produce a unified moral voice,” the church leaders wrote in their new declaration.

A 2007 resolution passed by the convention hewed to a more skeptical view of global warming.

In contrast, the new declaration, which will be released Monday, states, “Our cautious response to these issues in the face of mounting evidence may be seen by the world as uncaring, reckless and ill-informed.”

The document also urges ministers to preach more about the environment and for all Baptists to keep an open mind about considering environmental policy.

Jonathan Merritt, the spokesman for the Southern Baptist Environment and Climate Initiative and a seminarian at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, N.C., said the declaration was a call to Christians to return to a biblical mandate to guard the world God created.

More…

– This article is from the NY Times and they insist that folks have an ID and a PW in order to read their stuff. You can get these for free just by signing up. However, a friend of mine suggests the website bugmenot.com :arrow: as an alternative to having to do these annoying sign ups. Check it out. Thx Bruce S. for the tip.

Iran to Punish Apostasy with Death

Saturday, March 1st, 2008

 – Most people who believe that their religion is the best religion seem to find no irony in the idea that those who don’t want to believe, of their own free will, should need to be pressured to believe – in this case under penalty of death.

– It’s always seemed to me that if something is the ‘best’, then its superior qualities should be self evident to all.  And if folks have to be compelled to believe in its superior qualities, then I can think of no better indictment of its inferior nature.

 = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Apostasy — or the formal renunciation of religion — is already punishable in Iran with death. But now, Iran wants to make the death penalty for apostasy part of the penal code. The European Union is concerned and has asked Iran to reconsider.

The European Union this week sent a letter to authorities in Iran expressing its concern over a proposed change to the penal code that would make apostasy punishable by death.

The EU is responding to news that the Islamic Republic is planning to subject “apostasy, heresy and witchcraft” to the Hudud — the body of fixed punishments assigned to crimes that are considered violations of the “claims of God.” Other Hadud crimes include alcohol consumption, theft, highway robbery and illegal sexual intercourse.

As the news agency Reuters reported earlier this week, the EU, which opposes the death penalty as a matter of policy, expressed “acute concern” over the proposed penal code revision.

“These articles clearly violate the Islamic Republic of Iran’s commitments under the international human rights conventions,” Slovenian leaders, who currently head the rotating EU presidency, wrote in a statement.

“The EU calls upon the Iranian authorities, both in government and parliament, to modify the draft penal code in order to respect the obligations.”

The death penalty has already been applied to apostates in Iran — but this was never, since the founding of the Islamic Republic in 1979, institutionalized as a matter of legal practice.

Iran typically dismisses Western criticism of its legal system, claiming that Islamic law is fundamentally different.

More…

070220 – Tuesday – Francis Collins: The Scientist as Believer

Tuesday, February 20th, 2007

– I am both of a scientific bent of mind and a spiritualist which, I know, seems a stretch to many people. I’ve written a bit about this . And, in fact, when I come across arguments between religious people and scientists, I most frequently side with the scientists because I find a lot of religious thinking soft and circular. So, I found this article in National Geographic which a friend sent to me, very interesting. Collins walks very near the line I favor.

– The article:

—————————————–

The often strained relationship between science and religion has become particularly combative lately. In one corner we have scientists such as Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker who view religion as a relic of our superstitious, prescientific past that humanity should abandon. In the other corner are religious believers who charge that science is morally nihilistic and inadequate for understanding the wonders of existence. Into this breach steps Francis Collins, who offers himself as proof that science and religion can be reconciled. As leader of the Human Genome Project, Collins is among the world’s most important scientists, the head of a multibillion-dollar research program aimed at understanding human nature and healing our innate disorders. And yet in his best-selling book, The Language of God, he recounts how he accepted Christ as his savior in 1978 and has been a devout Christian ever since. “The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome,” he writes. “He can be worshiped in the cathedral or in the laboratory.” Recently Collins discussed his faith with science writer John Horgan, who has explored the boundaries between science and spirituality in his own books The End of Science and Rational Mysticism. Horgan, who has described himself as “an agnostic increasingly disturbed by religion’s influence on human affairs,” directs the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, New Jersey.

Interview by John Horgan

Horgan: As a scientist who looks for natural explanations of things and demands evidence, how can you also believe in miracles, like the resurrection?

Collins: I don’t have a problem with the concept that miracles might occasionally occur at moments of great significance, where there is a message being transmitted to us by God Almighty. But as a scientist I set my standards for miracles very high.

Horgan: The problem I have with miracles is not just that they violate what science tells us about how the world works. They also make God seem too capricious. For example, many people believe that if they pray hard enough God will intercede to heal them or a loved one. But does that mean that all those who don’t get better aren’t worthy?

Collins: In my own experience as a physician, I have not seen a miraculous healing, and I don’t expect to see one. Also, prayer for me is not a way to manipulate God into doing what we want him to do. Prayer for me is much more a sense of trying to get into fellowship with God. I’m trying to figure out what I should be doing rather than telling Almighty God what he should be doing. Look at the Lord’s Prayer. It says, “Thy will be done.” It wasn’t, “Our Father who art in Heaven, please get me a parking space.”

Horgan: I must admit that I’ve become more concerned lately about the harmful effects of religion because of religious terrorism like 9/11 and the growing power of the religious right in the United States.

Collins: What faith has not been used by demagogues as a club over somebody’s head? Whether it was the Inquisition or the Crusades on the one hand or the World Trade Center on the other? But we shouldn’t judge the pure truths of faith by the way they are applied any more than we should judge the pure truth of love by an abusive marriage. We as children of God have been given by God this knowledge of right and wrong, this Moral Law, which I see as a particularly compelling signpost to his existence. But we also have this thing called free will, which we exercise all the time to break that law. We shouldn’t blame faith for the ways people distort it and misuse it.

Horgan: Many people have a hard time believing in God because of the problem of evil. If God loves us, why is life filled with so much suffering?

Collins: That is the most fundamental question that all seekers have to wrestle with. First of all, if our ultimate goal is to grow, learn, and discover things about ourselves and things about God, then unfortunately a life of ease is probably not the way to get there. I know I have learned very little about myself or God when everything is going well. Also, a lot of the pain and suffering in the world we cannot lay at God’s feet. God gave us free will, and we may choose to exercise it in ways that end up hurting other people.

Horgan: Physicist Steven Weinberg, who is an atheist, asks why six million Jews, including his relatives, had to die in the Holocaust so that the Nazis could exercise their free will.

Collins: If God had to intervene miraculously every time one of us chose to do something evil, it would be a very strange, chaotic, unpredictable world. Free will leads to people doing terrible things to each other. Innocent people die as a result. You can’t blame anyone except the evildoers for that. So that’s not God’s fault. The harder question is when suffering seems to have come about through no human ill action. A child with cancer, a natural disaster, a tornado or tsunami. Why would God not prevent those things from happening?

Horgan: Some philosophers, such as Charles Hartshorne, have suggested that maybe God isn’t fully in control of his creation. The poet Annie Dillard expresses this idea in her phrase “God the semi-competent.”

Collins: That’s delightful—and probably blasphemous! An alternative is the notion of God being outside of nature and time and having a perspective of our blink-of-an-eye existence that goes both far back and far forward. In some admittedly metaphysical way, that allows me to say that the meaning of suffering may not always be apparent to me. There can be reasons for terrible things happening that I cannot know.

Horgan: I’m an agnostic, and I was bothered when in your book you called agnosticism a “cop-out.” Agnosticism doesn’t mean you’re lazy or don’t care. It means you aren’t satisfied with any answers for what after all are ultimate mysteries.

Collins: That was a put-down that should not apply to earnest agnostics who have considered the evidence and still don’t find an answer. I was reacting to the agnosticism I see in the scientific community, which has not been arrived at by a careful examination of the evidence. I went through a phase when I was a casual agnostic, and I am perhaps too quick to assume that others have no more depth than I did.

Horgan: Free will is a very important concept to me, as it is to you. It’s the basis for our morality and search for meaning. Don’t you worry that science in general and genetics in particular—and your work as head of the Genome Project—are undermining belief in free will?

Collins: You’re talking about genetic determinism, which implies that we are helpless marionettes being controlled by strings made of double helices. That is so far away from what we know scientifically! Heredity does have an influence not only over medical risks but also over certain behaviors and personality traits. But look at identical twins, who have exactly the same DNA but often don’t behave alike or think alike. They show the importance of learning and experience—and free will. I think we all, whether we are religious or not, recognize that free will is a reality. There are some fringe elements that say, “No, it’s all an illusion, we’re just pawns in some computer model.” But I don’t think that carries you very far.

Horgan: What do you think of Darwinian explanations of altruism, or what you call agape, totally selfless love and compassion for someone not directly related to you?

Collins: It’s been a little of a just-so story so far. Many would argue that altruism has been supported by evolution because it helps the group survive. But some people sacrificially give of themselves to those who are outside their group and with whom they have absolutely nothing in common. Such as Mother Teresa, Oskar Schindler, many others. That is the nobility of humankind in its purist form. That doesn’t seem like it can be explained by a Darwinian model, but I’m not hanging my faith on this.

Horgan: What do you think about the field of neurotheology, which attempts to identify the neural basis of religious experiences?

Collins: I think it’s fascinating but not particularly surprising. We humans are flesh and blood. So it wouldn’t trouble me—if I were to have some mystical experience myself—to discover that my temporal lobe was lit up. That doesn’t mean that this doesn’t have genuine spiritual significance. Those who come at this issue with the presumption that there is nothing outside the natural world will look at this data and say, “Ya see?” Whereas those who come with the presumption that we are spiritual creatures will go, “Cool! There is a natural correlate to this mystical experience! How about that!”

Horgan: Some scientists have predicted that genetic engineering may give us superhuman intelligence and greatly extended life spans, perhaps even immortality. These are possible long-term consequences of the Human Genome Project and other lines of research. If these things happen, what do you think would be the consequences for religious traditions?

Collins: That outcome would trouble me. But we’re so far away from that reality that it’s hard to spend a lot of time worrying about it, when you consider all the truly benevolent things we could do in the near term.

Horgan: I’m really asking, does religion require suffering? Could we reduce suffering to the point where we just won’t need religion?

Collins: In spite of the fact that we have achieved all these wonderful medical advances and made it possible to live longer and eradicate diseases, we will probably still figure out ways to argue with each other and sometimes to kill each other, out of our self-righteousness and our determination that we have to be on top. So the death rate will continue to be one per person, whatever the means. We may understand a lot about biology, we may understand a lot about how to prevent illness, and we may understand the life span. But I don’t think we’ll ever figure out how to stop humans from doing bad things to each other. That will always be our greatest and most distressing experience here on this planet, and that will make us long the most for something more.

To the original article:

– research thanks to Gertraude K.

‘Let go and let Love’

Sunday, February 18th, 2007

– I don’t subscribe to any particular spiritual philosophy. In fact, I’m drawn by the idea underlying a quote by Mahatma Gandhi.

My commitment is to truth as I see it each day, not to consistency.

– But, having said that, I do see things here I particularly like.  This story of a personal/spiritual philosophy appeals to me.

———————————————–

First up, an explanation of sorts. There’s been a continued ‘enlightenment’ theme to recent posts. Maybe it’s because I try not to plan what I write that posts tend to take on a life of their own, I don’t really know. All I can say is that I have a load of ideas around entrepreneurship, creativity and life hacks that I’d love to share with you too. But whilst we’re on the subject, and just so you have a little perspective as to ‘where I’m coming from’, I’ll tell you about my own path so far:

I guess we all come to the recognition of Truth in our own way and in our own time, and that’s good. My way seems very strange though. I was one of the so called lucky ones – I had my very own ‘burning bush’ experience but what I did with that beggars belief. I very, very subtly (so that I wouldn’t even notice I was doing it) turned and walked away from it.

More…