The Pageless Book Rotating Header Image

The Big God – Small God Dynamic

As a Christmas gift this year, I received the book “How God Changes Your Brain” by Andrew Newberg and Mark Robert Waldman, which discusses the latest neurological studies as to where in the brain spiritual and religious impulses originate. Of course, with a topic such as this, I consumed the whole book in two or three sittings and was left feeling like a little boy who shoved a whole cookie in his mouth. Clearly, I should have taken the time to savor this book and digest its meaning fully; I need to reread it to appreciate the scope of what these scientific findings mean and work out how they might impact my views on spirituality and religion.

Having said that, there is one thing that struck me about the research that goes a long way explaining a particular dichotomy – what I like to call the Big God / Small God Dynamic. In religions world-wide there seems to be roughly two distinct camps. One camp emphasizes God’s love for humanity, concerns itself with alleviating human suffering, and places a fair amount of importance on similarities between different religions. This is the Big God camp, because their God is big enough to accept everyone. The other camp emphasizes God’s judgment, concerns itself with human sin, and places a greater importance upon the differences between religions. This is the Small God camp, because this is uncompromising, wrathful, and discriminating.

As it turns out, there is a scientific reason behind this dichotomy in people’s views on God. Religious impulses originate in two areas of the brain – the frontal lobe and the limbic system. The frontal lobe, which is the more recently developed portion of the human brain, lights up with activity when the Big God is contemplated; it is also the origin abstract ideas such as love, peace, truth, and wisdom. The limbic system, which is the oldest portion of the human brain, lights up with activity when the Small God is contemplated; it is also the origin of our “fight or flight” response and very basic emotions such as anger and fear.

Both of these “Gods” exist as parts of the human mind, and most spiritual experiences are a blend of the two. However, if we look at spiritual trends over the last 100 years or so, there is a definite shift in which of these two concepts of God are favored; humanity is moving away from the judgmental wrathful God and towards a more peaceful loving God. I think this is proof of human evolution within the last century or so; we are slowly transitioning from a limbic religion to frontal lobe spirituality. The implication of this is that our brain is still evolving, and along with it, our concept of God is evolving as well.

Of course, it could also be argued that this is proof that belief in God is a product of our evolution and that we should see God as a defect of the human brain. I’m not in favor of such an argument, although I understand why and how that argument would be made. If God is nothing more than an adaptation, however, it would seem odd that this adaptation would continue to evolve over the last 100 years – a time frame during which physical demands on the human species have decreased, while intellectual demands have increased. It would make more sense if we saw belief in God slowly disappearing, instead of rapidly changing.

Or… perhaps I missed something in my first reading of “How God Changes Your Brain.” As I’ve already said, it is worth a second read.

GD Star Rating
loading...

The Sensitive Male

This past October, when I gave the eulogy for my father, I described him as stoic. As the fall and winter wore on, I’ve realized that word also applies to me pretty well. Despite the roller-coaster ride of illness, emotion, and stress that shook my world for more than a solid month, I was the one to urge to those around me that everything will work out and we would be okay. Even as I suffered a small emotional break that resulted in two weeks of leave from work, I tried to be the “strong one” that could be relied on.

I know that it is not healthy to hold so much emotional turmoil within, but to be honest, there isn’t a man I know who doesn’t try to be strong when life becomes hard. Grown men don’t cry… at least not when others are watching. Women often assume this is because we don’t want to look weak in front of each other – it really has nothing to do with macho posturing. The truth of the matter is that most men suppress their emotions because we put the emotional needs of others in our lives above our own; most men want to be someone’s hero.

Recently, I’ve seen a bumper sticker which summarizes how many women view male emotional needs; it reads “Men have feelings too, but who really cares?” This sentiment betrays a sexism that is just as vile as male bigotry towards women. It is more socially acceptable to malign men than it is denigrate women. Why? We’re supposed to be able to handle it. Perhaps this is why men, on average, have shorter life-spans than women.

I remember only a few times when my father cried. The ending of “Field of Dreams” always made him cry a little. He cried once when reading me an essay he wrote about his father. When his mother died, I remember him shedding a tear or two. In all honesty, though, I don’t remember seeing him ever openly sobbing; it was always just a tear or two and then he moved on to the next subject. It wasn’t because he didn’t care; no,my father was one of the gentlest souls I’ve ever known. In his mind, however, he needed to be ready to deal with the next crisis that confronted our family. This meant being emotionally strong.

My father died of a heart aneurysm. You could say he died of a broken heart; he spent his life working hard to provide for his family, and I don’t think any of us appreciated him as much as we should have. It wasn’t just stress that caused his death – he didn’t eat properly, sleep enough, or exercise – but the stress of being that “tough guy” that could handled anything certainly didn’t help

Maybe if we cared a little more about his feelings, maybe if he allowed himself to cry a little more and shared a little more of his emotional burdens he would have lived longer than fifty-some years. Maybe I should learn from his example and take better care of myself. If I do, who else will be strong enough to take my place? Such is the male dilemma that all sons inherit from their fathers.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Three Religions Meme

My blogging friend, Kay, from Ephemeral Thoughts, tagged me with the “Three Religions” Meme, after being tagged herself by Erin at Decompressing Faith. The rules of the meme are to list three religions, apart from your own, that you find fascinating and why. She tagged me because I am a bad blogging friend for not visiting her site more often; it is punishment, but I realize that she does it because she cares…

It isn’t too difficult for me to pick three religions that I’m interested in – the trouble is picking *only* three. My own spiritual path is a particular blend of Qabalah, Hermeticism, Zen Buddhism, and Taoism, so I’m going to assume that these four are off limits to my list. But -but-but… there are so many cool religions and I only get to pick three! It’s no fair!!! [Weeps uncontrollably]

Okay, I’m over it. This is my list:

• Catholicism

Take a moment and laugh and get it out of your system, and I’ll tell you why. Catholicism is cool. That’s right, I think Catholicism is cool. The ritual, artwork, architecture, history, and culture is fascinating to me. Catholicism is rich in traditions that reach back almost two thousand years that lays the ground work for the modern world. Sure – the dogma can be a little stifling, and Catholic attitudes towards sex and sexuality are deeply dysfunctional, but the advent of Catholic school girls more than makes up for all of that! GO NOTRE DAME!

• Wicca

I love the idea of worshiping the divine as Goddess and God rather than a singular male deity. Wicca has an honest approach to religion, sexuality, and life that I find emotionally refreshing and fulfilling. I like the idea of being closer to nature and freed of mankind’s need to dominate nature. I have to admit, Wicca is very attractive to me; it is a different mind-set that puts me deeply at peace. Unfortunately, Wicca does not fulfill my need for intellectual stimulation, as there is little need for deep philosophical thinking. Of course, this is part of why Wicca is so attractive – it isn’t complicated, it just is.

•Atheism

I know this isn’t technically a religion, but I believe it fits the intention of the meme. I admire atheists for their dedication to the truth and intellectual integrity. I admire how most atheists deal with the overwhelming prejudice they face in modern society – with a healthy sense of humor and honest debate. And despite rumor to the contrary, atheists are some of the most morally right-minded people in the world today. They actually think of why an action is right or wrong, rather than just accept someone’s word for it. I may disagree with Atheists on one important point – whether there is a God or not – but I respect them enough to admit they are more often right about the world than wrong.

I am tagging for this meme Ms. Kitty, Julian and Reg Webb. Have fun with it, guys.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Scapegoat Absolution

It is easier to blame someone else than accept one’s own failings. It is easier to fault some external evil rather than accept one’s own sin. This is no less true now than it was at the dawn of humanity and will continue to be just as true until its sunset. It is also true that quick easy solutions often cause more problems than they do repair.

In ancient times, this blame fell upon some symbolic sacrifice. The Greeks would drive a cripple or beggar out of their city after a natural disaster, believing that individual to carry whatever imagined sin that had brought the wrath of the Gods upon them. The Ancient Hebrews were more merciful; they would drive a goat out into the wilderness, carrying with it their collective transgressions, to die under the desert sun. Of course, the people of these towns were not be any more pious after their sacrifice than they were before, necessitating that this act be adopted as a yearly ritual. It is from this cultural oddity that we get the word “scapegoat.”

According to most Christian denominations, Jesus was conceived and died as the perfect sacrifice with which to absolve the sins of all mankind. This makes Jesus Christ the greatest scapegoat of all, in perverse sense… This may be part of the reason why I cannot accept him as anything more than a prophet of God; it just makes more sense to me, theologically, to accept Jesus as a wise teacher rather than as the savior of my immortal soul. However, this isn’t about my theological differences with Christianity. I want to emphasize one Christian idea which I agree with – Repentance.

Repent! It means accepting responsibility for your own actions. There is also, within its shades of meaning, suggestion of making amends and seeking forgiveness, which is all well and good, however these gestures ring hollow without acceptance of responsibility for your own actions. Responsibility is the cornerstone of morality – the bedrock on which all good laws sit – and no one should be spared from its burden.

Yet, repentance is squarely at odds with the scapegoat mentality that currently permeates American society. While some have shout for repentance in the streets, they have privately been guilty of the very sins they decry. When caught, it was the temptation of the devil and weakness of the flesh – anything other than a forward admission of guilt by the guilty.

We are always on the look out for next individual to blame and not enough time on fixing the root of the problem. Pro-life advocates place blame on women who seek abortions and doctors who provide abortions, instead of focusing on the root cause of teen pregnancy; ignorance and naiveté. Gun advocates and opponents alike argue over whether weapons prevent or promote crime, blaming the other for street violence, ignoring the common thread of poverty and hopelessness which push young men to become drug dealers, and gang member. Instead of focusing on recovering from the deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression, politicians worry more about pinning accountability for the financial mess on the other party.

Everyone wants someone to blame and no one wants to admit responsibility. No one wants to repent for the part they played, and yet repentance is what makes the world go around. If it was not for individuals choosing to take responsibility for their actions nothing would ever be accomplished. It is the repentant ones, good men and women, who view their own prosperity in contrast with the poverty around them, who view their own health in contrast with the suffering of others, and then chooses to help end these discrepancies. It doesn’t matter who is more to blame for these problems – if they played even a small part, they embrace responsibility for that issue.

Think about that the next time you want to say an error isn’t your fault or say issue is not your problem – and repent.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Something Very Serious

As opposed to my last few articles, which were not very serious at all…

GD Star Rating
loading...

Obligatory Thanksgiving Article 2009

It is that time of year again! Our family, friends, and neighbors have all… started driving like they own the road and would run down their own grandmother for a decent parking space. Yes, the holiday season makes me a bitter curmudgeon – can you really blame me? I work near the largest mall and shopping center in all of Baltimore and live near the next largest. In addition, this is the time of year that we are all poignantly reminded of the tight financial situation of others, while expected to ignore our own finances completely, which are usually pretty tight as well.

To compound this, there is always someone who makes religion an issue during this time of year. Fringe Atheists and Christians start making a big stink about the fact that it is Christmas time again, as if it didn’t happen last year or the year before that. These fringe Christians start by trying to force everyone to say “Merry Christmas” and fringe Atheists begin their campaign to ban depictions of baby Jesus from public places. After that, the fringe Christians will call all Atheists “secularists” and claim that they are trying to ruin Christmas, while the fringe Atheists call Christians “delusional” and claim that they are trying to push religion. Media then picks up on the name calling and run hour long sensationalist programs on the television machine about how divided our country is regarding religion, which serves only to further divide the country regarding religion.

There are only two bright spots for me during the holiday season; Thanksgiving and New Years. However, both of these bright spots are marred by the madness that ensues in between. In my experience, Thanksgiving and New Years bring out the best in people, while the Christmas shopping season brings out the worst. Can I be saved from being a Scrooge and a Grinch my whole life? Yes… and the answer is simple.

The answer is family, friends, and loved ones. Ignore the religious rhetoric and the ramped consumerism that make these holidays “modern” and return these holidays to their origin; family, friends, and loved ones. If everyone in this nation just focused on spending time with family, friends, and loved ones, instead of all the bullshit that has tainted the Christmas holiday in the recent twenty to thirty years, perhaps even I will enjoy it.

This means, as a Christian, realizing that not everyone shares your religious beliefs. This means, as a non-Christian, being tolerant of a religious holiday celebrated by the majority of English speaking people. This means not getting caught up in how little or how much you gave and received in gifts – not spending more than you are able so you regret it the following year. This means driving patiently and courteously, treating other drivers the same way in which you would want to be treated. This means drawing those who matter most to you close and reminding them of how much you think of them.

I’ve had one hell of a year – I think I deserve this much. Don’t screw up Christmas for me. Make it about family, friends, and loved ones; the rest of it doesn’t amount to a hill of beans anyway.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Omnitheism – Just Another “Ism”?

Everyone ought to worship God according to his own inclinations, and not to be constrained by force. – Flavius Josephus, 37 AD – 100 AD.

Omnitheism. It’s one of those words I like to throw around that no one quite understands. From an etymological standpoint the word is no different then pantheism in that both “pan-“ and “omni-” means “all” in Latin and Greek respectively. “Pantheism”, which is the worship of all things as collectively being God, is a well established word in the English language. This is in contrast with “Omnitheism” which can only be found sparely used by a handful of people on the internet and does not have a definition from an authoritative source.Why use a word that has so little history to describe my religious inclinations? It may seem silly, but I don’t believe any of the other words properly describe how I view the Divine. I’m not saying that there has not been others throughout history who share my particular understanding of the Divine. I’m not saying that I invented the word “Omnitheism” either, as there are currently at least three or four people who could lay claim to that title, none of whom are myself. I am going to work towards giving this word a proper definition that everyone can understand and appreciate, that clearly differentiates it from other religious terminology.

So what is Omnitheism? There are two ways in which you can define this word. One method of defining this word by dropping large theological concepts into the collective laps of my readers and elaborating on them with the eloquence of an 18th century philosopher. The benefit of defining a word this way is appearing intelligent and well educated to the two, or maybe three, readers that might be able to follow my train-wreck of logic. Seeing as I do not yet have a theological degree, I don’t see the point in trying to fool with break-teeth words; I would probably end up using the words incorrectly anyway.

The other method of definition looks at how we relate to the Divine and practice of our spirituality. This method, unlike the other, would give you an idea of what Omnitheism looks like. This is the method I want to use because I want to give you a working understanding of what it means to be an omnitheist. No pretense, no twelve syllable words, and no bull.

As you may have guessed, Omnitheism is a melting pot of religions and philosophies. Omnitheism is the belief that no single religion, philosophy, or science can ever accurately explain or describe in full the nature of reality, the nature of the human experience, or the nature of the divine, yet each contributes to an over-all understanding of such. In addition, Omnitheism encourages constant spiritual exploration and experimentation in contrast to the unyielding belief or dogma of many religions. This may lead to many interesting questions. I’m not going to attempt to answer them all in one post, but I will attempt to touch on what omnitheists believe concerning God, what makes Omnitheism different from other spiritual paths, and how omnitheists worship.

To an omnitheist, the Divine is both distant and personal, a part of creation and apart from creation, many entities and one, intelligent and a force of nature. The metaphors and examples of what omnitheists believe concerning God could very well fill an entire book. I’ll spare you the repetition; the bottom line is, our language and logic are not able fully explain the nature of the Divine. Seemingly contradictory statements made about the Divine could very well both be true in one sense and both false in another sense. Omnitheists don’t pretend to know the nature of God, but still can form their own opinions based upon what is known to be true and their own personal spiritual experience.

One thing that all Omnitheists agree on is that the Divine does not seem to differentiate believers in one religion from the other. Members of all religions and paths have similar profound experiences, although they might be interpreted differently depending on the culture. Omnitheism takes that observation and brings it to a logical conclusion. It doesn’t matter how you define the Divine, all that matters is that it is experienced by all people.

How is Omnitheism, then, different then deism or spiritual atheism? It is how omnitheists relate to the collected wisdom, practices, and stories of other religions. Unlike deism or spiritual atheism, Omnitheism still finds validity in the holy texts, practices, and the ideas of other religions. Omnitheism teaches that the Divine speaks to different people in different ways. Just because the Divine reveals itself to one person in one fashion and other people in another fashion does not mean one must be true and the other false.

As already discussed, our language and understanding are not fully able to comprehend the Divine, so what the Divine gives us are allegories and symbolism. While this makes all holy texts inherently flawed, through attempting to understand what is being said and the essential truths behind the words and practices, we begin to be able to realize more of those truths. That realization and work cannot be done by someone else; it has to be done by each individual for him or herself.

That leads us to the issue of worship. The problem, if you can call it a problem, is that Omnitheism is a belief that can manifest itself in a large number of ways. You could almost imagine this faith as an empty white room that you are expected to paint in any color or combination of colors that you desire. This differs from mainstream religions, in that the work of building a relationship with the divine isn’t already done. You must put forth the effort to find what colors, or what means of worship, work for you.

The majority of omnitheists will be those who strive to worship God through the practices of several different religions. It only makes sense; most people would become omnitheists because they see similarity and beauty in more then one religion. Does that mean that the practice of these omnitheists are cobbled together like some strange Frankenstein monster? No. Omnitheism is not only the view that all religions are valid, but also is the view that all religions should be respected. What it means is that omnitheists will try to relate to God in a way that is completely unique unto themselves, making a subtle art out of their own worship. One might find regular prayer and meditation important to their individual worship, while another omnitheist might preform rituals of her own design. Yet another omnitheist may forgo all means of worship, concentrating instead in honoring the Divine by living a life of integrity and joy.

I’m not claiming that Omnitheism is for everyone, nor am I suggesting that this spiritual path is more valid just because it is broader in scope. Each person needs to find their own way to relate to the Divine; no one religion or path can ever satisfy everyone. As someone who has taken a serious look at several different religions and realized that they each have something to offer, I found “Omnitheist” to be the only label with which I felt comfortable. I suspect that there are more than a few other individuals who might feel as I do, but just do not have the word to describe what they believe. Perhaps you feel that Omnitheism fits you, or perhaps someone you know, as well?

Originally Published October 12th, 2007.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Blaming God

In case you haven’t been reading this blog recently, a great deal of really bad, stressful shit has hit the fan in my personal life lately. Illness, death in the family, hospitalization of my wife, and my very own mini-mental breakdown has all occurred within the past 48 days. Today it was decided that my mother’s cat needs to be put down. I was never close to that cat and thought it wouldn’t affect me emotionally, but with everything else that has occurred, it so happens that it does make me feel slightly depressed. It’s just another thing to add to the list of recent hardships, I guess.

During the last 48 days, I’ve been confronted by a few individuals who blame God on some level for these misfortunes. After all, if God is all powerful, he should be able to prevent the faithful from suffering, right? I’ve even pulled my copy of God’s Problem by Bart D. Ehrman recently because it deals directly with squaring the “Problem of Suffering” with belief in an “All Powerful Benevolent God.” Mr. Ehrman’s conclusion was that the reality of suffering doesn’t square at all with such a God; he’s either not all powerful or he’s an uncaring schmuck. Any way you slice it, Mr. Ehrman’s conclusion is that God is not worthy of worship, if God exists at all.

Despite all of this, I have never felt the need to blame God for my misfortunes. Even now, I have no inclination to blame God, what-so-ever. I have tried to explain why I don’t blame God in logical terms with limited success. My words ring hollow in the ears of those who I would try to console – they hear platitudes within my theories on the necessity of suffering, evil as a social construct, and human free will. The truth of the matter is, when I listen to my theories, I can hear the platitudes too.

My problems are not nearly as horrific as they could be. There are children starving in Somalia, while hardened warmongers eat well just a few miles away. Right now in India, a woman is being set upon fire by her husband because he no longer wants to be married to her, and will face little punishment for doing so. There is genocide that is occurring right now in some foreign country that goes largely ignored by the mainstream media because it doesn’t sell advertising as well as Hollywood scandal. I am aware of all of this; I still choose not to blame God.

I’ve come to realize that it isn’t due to any theory or logic that I find no fault with God; it is a choice. I could find reason to blame God for my misfortunes, but I choose not to do so. It is an unconscious choice, to be sure, but it was still a choice I made. I’ve realized that by choosing to not blame any divine being for the pain and suffering here on Earth, I waste no time or energy on anger towards circumstances that I simply cannot change. While others are paralyzed with anger for a God that they cannot harm, I’m dealing with this problem of suffering here on Earth and doing what needs to be done. At the same time, I still believe in a Divine Source that is worthy of worship. I don’t know if that makes me wise or a fool… Maybe I’ll just settle for being a wise fool.

GD Star Rating
loading...

New Functionality

Hello Everyone.

Just thought I’d let you know that I’ve increased the functionality of my blog by adding the ability to vote on how much you liked a particular post, and added a list of related posts to bottom of each post. This is all in an attempt to draw more visitors to my website. However, I do not want to alienate the friends I already have… so if you find any particular feature distracting, let me know. I’ve tried only to include new features that are stylish and minimalist, but it isn’t just my opinion that matters…

So try out the new functions and let me know what you think.
Thank you.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Morality and the Two Types of People

There are two types of people in this world; those who believe that there are two types of people, and those who understand that we are all one people. The root of all evil, the origin of suffering, is within the belief that we are all divided – us against them. Let me be explicit about what I am saying; when one human suffers, all of humanity suffers, and where one human harms another, there is evil.

If we were to work together, famine, disease, poverty, and war could become distant memories. We have the technology to feed the entire world and heal those suffering from the deadliest of viruses; because we believe we are separate, we don’t take the initiative to resolve these issues. We, as individuals, believe that we can’t trust others to do the right thing or share their wealth, so we hoard power and money, creating war and poverty as a result. This is the cause of the majority of human suffering. Can we all agree that is evil?

Previously, I’ve argued in favor of relative morality and against absolutes in morality. While the conclusions of my reasoning have stayed the same, the actual reasoning itself has been evolving. I no longer feel that the dichotomy between relative and absolute morality is as clean as I previously believed. There is an absolute to morality; to sustain the survival of humanity under the best possible conditions for the longest period of time.

Morality is, at its very core, a function for the survival of social creatures. During the dawn of humanity, morality meant to have loyalty to one’s family, clan, or tribe. A moral person had to defend their people against outsiders, who brought with them disease and war, or at best were competition for valuable resources. Men were expected to hunt, women were expected to bear children, and life was short and violent. This isn’t the best possible condition we can expect today, but with their limited technology, it is the best that could be hoped for at that time.

As our technology has changed our circumstances, the restrictions that were at one time necessary to maintain our species have become less meaningful. The problem is that human morality is lagging behind the morality that our technology can afford us; we are still caught up in the “us against them” paradigm, when our technology can support a “one human family” paradigm. This is hindering our evolution as a species and causes far more human suffering than is necessary.

Yes, we as a species have made some progress; racism, sexism, nationalism, and bigotry of all forms have been cast as shadows by the light of reason. Yet they still linger in political and public discourse. We still harbor this “us against them” mentality that unnecessarily hampers our ambitions as a species. I’ve come to the conclusion that evil isn’t a metaphysical entity with malicious intentions. Instead, evil is the divisions within humanity which hinders us from achieving world peace and prosperity. We are one people. Once we realize this, all obstacles become surmountable.

First Published October 16th 2008

GD Star Rating
loading...