http://religiousstudies.uncc.edu/people/jtabor/
crystal.pelepchuk@gmail.com

His big revelation the night before was that he couldn't base his happiness off revelations.

His big revelation that followed that morning was where he was supposed to put his trust in.

He couldn't put trust in the fluctuations of a continuing dialog he maintained he kept with God. His illustration of thus was fleshed out in the set up of a chess board in his room which represented the ongoing battle of minds he had with God.

No the love of wisdom could not be his foundation for happiness.

Where was he to put his trust?

In himself as one thinker commented?

In the Buddha? In God? Abstract conceptions that might as well be a million miles away.

He visited a meeting under the name of "the buddhist place" He'd been itching to go there for a while now when he would visit his friend.

A man was struggling with what to do with fear. He couldn't remember the guy's name because he never remembered names.

The person who seemed to be some sort of anarchist version of leadership, not at a pulpit but sitting on the floor with every one else. He started commenting about fear that awareness of the fear is one of the steps one could try.

The answer was in himself. He struggled with fear and still was up to that moment struggling with fear.

"The opposite of fear is trust" He commented.

Things like philosophy and metaphysics and religion and spirituality are clearly subjective. Why did he feel an objective connecting of the dots? he felt everyone in the room gasp inside their spirits.

It wasn't his idea either. It was simply the centre of his struggle. The centre of his struggle became the centre of conversation. His friend opened him up to the dichotomy of fear and trust over the phone.

He felt a supposed felt and a trembling attempt at making objective such terribly subjective things as God and redemption. His supposed felt was that God was asking him to just trust him.

He let go of all his opinions and entered a pure fence sitting agnosticism. No positive statements. No negative statements.

God, he would be timid to say, told him to trust him.

No more security blanket of determinism where everything was meant to be.

No more feelings that his heterodoxy was exactly where God wanted him to be.

In the conversation with a room of spiritual truth seekers he held back from saying "If you believe in a personal God you can put your trust in them"

When this thought passed is when one person commented whether or not we should put trust in ourselves.

That's an interesting tangent. Do we trust ourselves to lead ourselves?

He argued with satanists on some forum that he himself needed a saviour. He couldn't trust himself.

It was after a meeting with the local church pastor that he first opened himself up to this underlying fear that became alive as he smoked and listened to a river he was sitting by.

He realised that he only believed that all things were predestined because ultimately he was scared to death of freewill. The chaos, oh the fucking chaos that would be unleashed if everything wasn't neatly ordered by some divine agent.

So he let go of determinism.

He entertained questions that only encouraged his fears.

He was suddenly scared that he might have been all along being decieved and where he was was exactly where God didn't want him to be.

Oh the agony of the fear. Oh the tripping and gnawing over the question as the one whose name forgot worded the plea for an answer "What do we do with fear?"

Noticing fear arise, I recognize the arising of fear. In a state of pure terror, I recognize the state of pure terror.

Did God want him to be there for this discussion to comment that the opposite of fear was trust?

Where than was he to put his trust?

Not in revelations that are impermanent and at the whims of a chemical process, what you spent all night reading when you should have been sleeping, or waiting on some divine moment when the ongoing chess game with God became a real experience surrounding you with a consensus of thinkers.

Trust.

The door unlocked. It made so much fucking sense. Trust.

The revelation that has been avoided in revealing is to put trust in the present moment.

Trust that everything is going to be alright.

Trust in the beauty of the present moment.

Who cares about arguments of whether or not things are ordered out according to some divine script or whether or not everything is in fact a chaos of things bumping into each other.

If you can't really understanding why trusting the present moment really unlocked everything for him, you must not be meant to read this. Maybe you are. Maybe you're not supposed to get it. Maybe there is supposed to be a seed planted where like when he was at home smoking and he'd suddenly realize he was smoking. Maybe a gasp will erupt from your spirit when you finally get what it means to trust the present moment.

Everything is going to be alright. Just trust.

Could it have been the beer that compounded the fuckness of his head? Was fuckness even a word? When he explained that his head was fucked all day, they questioned why he felt fucked. It was an opening for him to explain what exactly was meant when he said his mind was fucked.

He didn't want to blame the meeting with the buddhists. He didn't want to entertain notions that he was outside of God's will going there.

The truth was though that being in a room of like minded thinkers, being caught up in in depth conversations. People who were thinkers, oh glorious thinkers. People who were invested in all the concepts he only saw in books. Concepts that were realized into the reality in front of him. These people lit a flame in him that was happiness and joy. His mind was on fire from being with these thinkers. He was elated to just practice what he had been practicing alone with other people.

So the blame for his fucked mind was truly the fact he went to that place and sat on that floor and listened to that guy talked and that he broke bread and discussed far out things.

He spent six dollars on six books at public library book sale.

God wanted him to focus on the Bible but he ended up buying texts he realised would only distract him away from this supposedly divine mandate. Some bahai book. The koran. The book of mormon. The catechism of the catholic church. A  book about the four gospels' origin..Some book that took a text book approach to buddhism.

What do the naming of these texts evoke in you?

Apprehension?

A realization of why this poor soul was so confused?

Conflicting doctrines, conflicting dogmas, conflicting ideas.

These books to him were the centre of some people's deepest expression towards the divine. This trembling towards the divine could not be wrong in his eyes. Some people held these texts up as their authority of truth.

Was he opening himself up to further deception?

Trust.

He had to stick to the mandate he felt from God to stick to the Bible.

These books were an investment for exploration at a later date.

The conclusions that he would find in these books may be against his deepest convictions. He didn't care. He was looking for that trembling towards the divine. He was looking for people who sought connection with the divine.

The next day was a quiet day. His mind wasn't on fire. He didn't feel a need to open those books. He didn't want to read the Bible and he didn't want to distract himself away from reading the Bible and so concluded to not go too indepth. He read a bit of the bahai book and a bit of the catechism book. There was no drawing need to go too far with them.

When someone may ask what he did with his weekend there is certain events that could draw a picture of his activities.

The following day after meeting with Buddhists and having his mind on fire he went to a relaxed informal church meeting. To call it church would not really describe it. It was people, thinkers like himself, sitting around on couches. It was a person calmly talking. It wasn't much different than what he went to the previous day.

No revelations followed him that day. It felt good not to have any revelations. It felt good that things didn't go deep.

Maybe God knew that he needed to relax. Maybe God realized he needed desperately a break from all this thinking.

There was moments during day where when he was reflecting on his struggles he realised how on the edge of insanity he felt at times.

Little things like cutting down on coffee, and making attempts at increasing his protein intake were ways of trying to balance the chemicals in his body.

He really needed to talk to his psychiatrists.

Would this battle with his mind, this struggle no longer consume him if he simply changed his medications.

People. Thinkers. These were they in whom he placed his trust when he couldn't trust abstract notions.

He had to trust that his psychiatrist would be able to see that he could be more stable.

He had to trust those he talked to that he wasn't too far out, that he wasn't too crazy, that he wasn't falling into deception.

Trusting the moment was all he could do with the battle between freewill and determinism.

So he had a relaxing day trying his best to turn his mind off.

He was broke and was running out of cigarettes.

He was drinking tea at the end of the night.

These trivial details are to be meditated upon and see if they really illuminate his human condition.

He was a fragile human. He had a fragile mind. He was unaware of the strength of his mind.

8.) Harpur if he had to be categorised according to what we've studied would be seen as a theist. He believes in a God whose presence is found within everyone. He believes in a God who doesn't have an elect or chosen people. He believes all humans are God's chosen people. He is against any idea of a God who supports war and the separation of humans according to their differing beliefs. He writes and distinguishes from his God the God who is ". . . the false, impostor god, that great idol which sanctions war in all its ghastly form." He writes as well that this impostor God is an exclusivist God "...who demands that his followers always see themselves as unique and separated from all others because of their creeds, traditions, and sacred rites." Harpur doesn't necessarily believe this war god is a being that necessarily exists, rather it's a concept that has real world implications and serves only to divide humanity. The God that Harpur actually believes in is not blood thirsty, angry, jealous or exclusivist. He writes "all humans are God's chosen people; all races are the true God's special children; all honest genuine religious impulses come from the One God alone." He writes this saying that all people are God's people, that all sincere religious impulses lead to God and concludes that there is this "One God alone."  He goes on to write where this God can be found. He writes "It is this: that we are all, each of us a bearer of God's presence within. It is the story of incarnation, of the divine "Emmanuel, God-within-us," in every human mind and heart." Harpur doesn't believe in a God who divides mankind between his chosen people and those who are simply out of luck. He doesn't believe in a God who puts mankind at war against it's self. Harpur believes in the God that is found in every one.

9) How would the four views discussed comment on Harpurs editorial? There's a dangerous trap when discussing the nature of God of an "us versus them" which Harpur tries to expose. The funny thing about this trap is even when talking about it, we can in fact fall into it. It is one I believe we are all guilty of and I also believe is perfectly natural to fall into. Deism would say God is shut off from everyone and there is no special class, theism would say God is open to a person relationship with everyone, pantheism would say everything and everyone is a manifestation of God and there is no special class of people who aren't God, and Hinduism would say that Brahman is the Atman, the inner consciousness of every being. As we'll see the moment you declare an attribute of God you are dividing the human race between those who believe such a declaration and those who do not.

Deism believes God is simply beyond this universe. Deism believes that God created the universe and set it like an engineer towards certain rules and remains impersonal and beyond this universe. Voltaire would comment that when people try to interact with God they make him in their own image and thus would create themselves as a special class of people that God has chosen. This is an erroneous view in Voltaire's eyes. He writes that people simply pray to him believing God is one way (their way) and it mocks God saying God is somehow supportive of that person's or groups of person's beliefs. Voltaire is quoted as saying "In short, all nations pray to God: wise men resign themselves and obey him." He is also quoted as saying ". .  .you commit a crime the more in asking for what you do not deserve." Voltaire saying God is impersonal and far beyond us  ends up illustrating that there are the wise who understand God is simply beyond us and the unwise whose prayers are "weak, frivolous, inconstant;" they believe God to be one thing and mock him. Voltaire unfortunately falls into this trap that Harpur illustrates of there being a special class of people. This division between people isn't God choosing a certain persons as Harpur illustrates but one of saying some people are wise and some are the unwise whose prayers are futile.

Theism believes God to be personal and the source of all people's being. It is contrasted against Deism as Deism simply states a material universe was created and it was left to it's own devices. Theism believes God has a continual and active investment in his creation. Berkeley believes God is the source of all beings: "nothing can be more plainly legible than the intimate presence of an All-wise Spirit, who fashions, regulates and sustains the whole system of beings." Believing God is the source of all beings doesn't hold Berkeley back from falling into this trap which a lot of theists which Harpur illustrated fall into. Berkeley wrote "though the Lord conceal himself from the eyes of the sensual and lazy, who will not be at the least expense of thought, yet to an unbiased and attentive mind nothing can be more plainly legible than the intimate presence of an All-wise Spirit, who fashions, regulates and sustains the whole system of being." Like the deist has fallen into Harpur's trap Berkely divides people into those who are "sensual and lazy" those who don't understand God because they don't have an "unbiased and attentive mind" Though Berkely believes everyone derives their being from a personal God he also falls into Harpur's trap of dividing people.

The pantheism shown to us here by Spinoza is strictly monist. Pantheism believes all of reality is God. Pantheism believes there is only one reality and that is God. Spinoza being a pantheist would comment on Harpur's editorial that these people who divide people into God's chosen and the unchosen are ignorant of the idea that everything and everyone, all of reality is God. Spinoza actually comes to close to describing exactly what Harpur has described. Spinoza wrote ".. that everyone thought out for himself, according to his abilities, a different way of worshipping God, so that God might love him more than his fellows, and direct the whole course of nature for the satisfaction of his blind cupiditiy and insatiable avarice." He would comment the reason why people divide the human race into the chosen and the unchosen is because of their ignorance of the true nature of God. Spinoza though unknowingly falls into this "us versus them" trap when he declares there is those who are ignorant of the nature of reality and those like himself who are not.

The Hindu view is presented by Swami Nikhilananda. He would comment like the pantheist and the theist: God is present in every one. The very concept of God known as Brahman in Hinduism is that it permeates all beings. This is very similar to the view taken up by Harpur that God dwells in every being. Swami is quoted as writing "The word Atman is used to denote the immutable inner Consciousness...the unchanging and trasncendental Consciousnless in man, present in his every act of cognition, no matter what the level or state of the experience." Brahman is present in every conscious being. Outside of this text I have learned from Hinduism that Brahman in fact is every person but merely wearing the mask of themselves. This is more to the core of what Atman means. Brahman is everyone and everyone is Brahman. How the Hindu would approach the apparent divide found when people fall into this trap of dividing peoples according to their views of God, whether or not they're chosen or whether or not they belong to an exclusivist view Swami writes concerning the Brahman "It is the Supreme Unity of contradictions: in It alone all differences are harmonized." Brahman essentially is where all this division finds it's unity. The person who believes God is shut off from this universe and the person who believes God is the universe find their unity in Brahman. Swami also writes "It is the intangible Unity that pervades all relative existence and gives a strong metaphysical foundation to fellowship, love, unselfishnesss, and other ethical disciplines. Being the immortal Essence of every man, It compels us to show respect to all, in spite of their illusory masks." Swami is basically saying that when we fall into this trap it is because of our illusory masks. If we surveyed Hinduism in it's totality I feel safe in saying it in some instances does fall into this trap, for example it's support of the caste system through the idea that karma is the reason for a person's predicament. Swami writes that Brahman is the source of all fellowship, love and unselfishness, Brahman is the source of the unity of all peoples. I think if questioned Swami would state that all people are wearing illusory masks, that there isn't a person who isn't wearing a mask. This mask is ourselves and these masks are that which Brahman wears.

This "us versus them" mentality is one that is hard to escape. Even when Harpur illustrates there are people with this mentality who are trying to gain a monopoly on the concept of God even he is guilty of pointing the finger and declaring an "us versus them" situation. The problem and trap that Harpur illuminates is one that is hard not to fall into when we really analyse what we believe. Deism believes God is shut off from everyone and yet Voltaire believes there are the wise who realize this and the unwise who do not. Theism believes every person derives their being from God, it goes on to state there are the people who are simply too lazy to understand God and those who understand and appreciate God being the source of our being. Pantheism states everything, all of reality is God. It states God is the source of all existence and is existence. Spinoza falls into this trap himself when he writes of those who are ignorant of the fact of God's existence as reality. Hinduism according to our source material doesn't fall immediately guilty of this and even goes on to illustrate that all this "us versus them" mentality finds it's unity in Brahman. The person who believes one thing and is different from another finds it's unity in Brahman. What can be concluded from this survey other than that whether or not we derive our being from God or are God we are still perfectly human and when we declare positive or negative attributes of God we end up pointing the finger at those who disagree. This doesn't always mean they become the opposition, but we still we need to be careful that we don't fall into that trap. This "us versus them" even in Harpur's illumination of it concerning the nature of God and how it divides people, he writes "Their present tyranny prevents the vision of the One True Source within us all." While pointing to the "us versus them" mentality, he himself is pointing the finger. The only conclusion we can make is that we are all guilty of this. There is still hope as much as we are so terribly human we are still according to Harpur "a bearer of God's presence within."

10) A God who is intimately close to us, our consciousness that is in fact Brahman, us being God, the God within. All are views that inch towards the basic idea of God that Harpur believes in. God's presence can be found within every thinking, living being. Matters such as these are in the realm of speculation and theory. I personally can't claim to know there is a God, although I do make the declaration that I believe in a God. I believe we can only get a basic gist of the truth and this basic gist that God is within us or we are in fact God or our consciousness is God is where my theories and speculations reside. From my limited perspective of religion I believe this is the basic gist that is communicated in the majority of religions as Harpur states in his editorial. God is not exclusive, God is close and personal to every human being. Whether or not this means God is in us, or we are God does not matter. It may seem kind of ridiculous to argue the essence of an idea and not a concrete opinion. I would argue that reaching knowledge of the nature of God can't really be grasped in dialectics. We can only reach a gist of the unknowable. To me God hides from us, we simply cannot know. The strange answer to this though is that God hides according to my view inside us, within our very being.

Berkely leads us off with this idea that God hides. "the hand which actuates the whole is itself unperceivable to men of flesh and blood. "Verily (saith the prophet) "thou are a God that hidest thyself'" " He argues though that man being sensuous and lazy is why God hides. He argues that God is self evident to the unbiased and attentive mind. The open and searching mind is that which finds God. We have four different perspectives on the nature of God. From them we can see that an open and searching mind doesn't reach the same conclusion as another open and searching mind. This is just further evidence of if this God really exists he is hiding from us. People for millenia have searched for God with open and searching minds and all have reached different conclusions. Harpur's argument in his editorial is against the opinions of people who he claims have erected a false idol, a god of war in place of the true God. From differences of opinion we can only reach a basic gist of what the truth is. All are perspectives of the possible truth of a God that is out there and hiding from us.

All we have proven thus far is that God hides. A myriad of thinkers all searching for God reach different conclusions concludes for me that God (if He exists) hides from us. The myriad of perspectives on the truth of God only reinforces my idea that God hides and that we can only logically conclude an essence of truth; a basic gist. The problem with this type of argument and most arguments concerning God is this is a matter of faith. People believe through faith the differing conclusions that people reach. I basically agree with Harpur's view that God is within us. I believe that to reach this God within ourselves we cannot reach it through logical argumentation. You simply need to search him out and I believe that that search is a search within. The Hindu concept of atman, the view of God where God resides within our consciousness. If we look out at a universe and conclude it is created by a God we are concluding by the inner awareness of the outer reality. We look out at the universe and percieve through our consciousness which according to Hinduism is Brahman. Our consciousness is in fact God. We only need to search the depths of our own consciousness to find God. Berkely writes "that nothing can be more evident to any one that is capable of the least reflexion than the existence of God" It takes inner reflection and seeking of this God within to find God. If we suppose God exists, if we suppose God is intimate and personal I ask: where else would God reside than within the very depths that is accesible to every human?

I must admit my own defeat even before writing a single word of this essay. I cannot lead you to find God through an essay when my argument is that God is found within. To argue matters of God and his nature we must suppose. We must first suppose God exists before we can even start speculating about God's nature. The idea of God is a concept of something beyond all logic and reasoning. God's existence can neither be proven or disproven. To go on to argue the nature of this God is only to speculate about an area where we've already taken a leap of blind faith. This is why my argument isn't really anything to do necessarily with God specifically more so that we must take a leap of faith. In Star Trek: The Motion Picture the characters come across a sentient machine named V'ger that has searched for knowledge all across the universe. It all culminates into this discussion: "Spock: V'ger must evolve. It's knowledge has reached the limits of this universe and it must evolve. What it requires of it's God doctor is the answer to its question: is there nothing more? Bones: What more is there than the universe Spock? Decker: Other dimensions, higher levels of being. Spock: The existence of which cannot be proven logically therefore V'ger is incapable of believing in them. Kirk: What V'ger needs in order to evolve is a human quality, our capacity to leap beyond logic." We cannot prove something beyond this universe within the means of this universe. To find God we ultimately need to make a leap beyond logic. A tree is not necessarily evidence of God. A tree is evidence of a tree. It is our supposing of God that the existence of a tree and the origin of the tree suddenly makes sense. When we suppose that God exists as our creator the puzzle of existence suddenly makes sense. I personally reach the conclusion of God existing within simply by choice and an act of faith.

This essay has been a strange journey for me. I started basically stating that I can't formulate a concrete argument but more sketch a basic essence or gist. I have then argued that God hides from us. I believe this because of the varying beliefs concerning God that exist. This is the reason why we end up having people choosing teams and taking sides. Harpur has illustrated this with his image of the imposter war god who is a false idol. I have then argued that God hides within us. This is because I believe God would hide exactly where he can be found, within our hearts and minds. This is the conclusion that Harpur reaches with his survey of the major religions. I then go full circle back to my original thesis that we can only argue a faint picture drawn with a hand trembling towards truth. The things discussed are of the nature that they cannot really be proven either way. I basically argue all arguments about God start with a presupposition. It is a choice to believe after we've exhausted all thinking and arrive at choosing whatever makes most sense to us. Concerning my stance on epistemology taken with this essay I will conclude with this verse from 1 Corinthians 13:9-12 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

lord,

i can feel my spiritual languishing. but maybe that's all it is - feelings. I know feelings aren't always true. I know that you're real and I know that you're listening to me.

I just question whether or not I am truly hearing you. I wonder if your voice is really really just my own voice for real - just pretending to be you.

I know you are there - but i still feel distant - point of recognition

i know you are there but i can still feel you close - i just had to quote that lyric for the sake of quoting it.

God how many people actually quote lyrics to you?

i dont know - i'm just rambling

im trying to speak to you from my heart

i love you so much lord.

i know that feelings aren't always true and in fact can be deceiving.

i know you are there.

i just feel as if my spiritual longings are started to dissipate. i am wondering if i am losing interest in you. im wondering if im actually just coming down from a manic psychosis and all those times i felt you were in fact just deceptive feelings of . . well .. psychosis.

what happens to religion (i use that word hesistantly) becomes normal?

is my relationship just becoming normal with you

is that a good thing?

it becoming normal

Lord I just don't want to lose sight of you in the routine of my days. i don't want to be writing things that are unworthy to be written of you.

i know its a dark tale im writing and i feel the writing has some sort of purpose - but lord its just so dark

lord,

i want to know you really care about my writing and aren't just letting me write some fucked up book that ends in a fucked up way because you don't care

no

i know you care

i just dont want to be doing things outside of your guidance

i dont even know if i should post this online

probably not

i know this is personal

i guess this would help some people. i know if i post it on my blog that no one reads - maybe the right person will read it

lord im so sorry for . . no im not sorry. i know you would forgive anyways - but i know that the times that i dont even want to say ignorant - but rather didn't have a focus on you - weren't really my fault and ultimately you had a purpose in those times

lord i need to quit smoking

alright here comes the petitioning for some want - no more discussing things - no more just talking to you like a friend

lord i need you to help me quit smoking

i have a problem, i can admit that - i smoke and i smoke and i smoke way too much

i need you to help me with step one - desiring to quit

i need your gentle voice to remind me not to light up that second smoke

maybe thats where we can start - eliminating chainsmoking

lord i didn't write anything to you lastnight - because i just felt silence in myself

right now im just writing and writing and i dont even know what im going to write next

i know you're listening

so what do you think?

do you think i should quit writing this graphic novel and work on something holy?

do you think i need to just go burn all my cigarettes and then freeze my bank account and go through a period of insane cravings and longings

can we work together on these things?

lord help me write the right things - help me reflect the right emotions - if im going to do a dark tale help me cement in the real moral of the story

help me so madoc's enlightenment - help me show that what happens is terribly wrong - help this not be a work that gets misunderstood - help it become a light in a tunnel - although its a dark tale.

i dont have much left to say

can you help me with my meditation - teach me what to focus on - or what not to focus on - let me hear an answer from you

again i ask

let me not lose interest in you

let my nightly rituals never become an empty ritual

inject life into my spiritual expressions towards you

let me find life and abundance in my spiritual religious expressions

i know you've got a lot planned for me - and im glad im not losing sight of the moment lord - but don't let my passion for graphic design dwindle - help that flame burnt brightly when the time comes - i want to be excited for going back to school - i don't want to think of it as a trial or a huge obstactle - i dont really want to think of it as anything but a process towards betterment

i love you lord

thank you

Its been nearly a week and a half since I made some choices about how I am going to approach my thinking processes in regard to religion and my obsession with it.

I have written in my novel I am trying to give birth to that I have given up on religion. This has grown over the past week of depression into a giving up on Christianity.

I think it can be argued that I really already gave up on religion a long time ago. My thoughts (maybe not my actions, but that's a different topic) have shown that I don't agree with organized religion whatsoever.

To define religion merely as a way of life supported by a system of beliefs would be a weak definition as it can be argued everybody is somewhat guided by a system of beliefs. It is the popular opinions and popular system of beliefs and when you decide to follow a set guideline for thinking, that to me is religion. That is what I give up upon. I give up the idea that I need to follow a popular system of belief, that I need to believe as others believe to support my way of life. My way of life when it comes to believe is strictly anarchist (pardon the term). I believe in no religious authority over me. I may take some truths from popular systems of belief, I may enjoy reading some holy scripture and it doesn't have to just be the bible. I may even agree with some points popular systems of belief display. Such as love your enemies and take care of the poor and needy. However I place no authority in religion over my life. I place my own personal authority on top of religion in my life in that I decide what I believe; not what popular opinion or rigid dogma may dictate.

So it can be argued that I gave up on religion a long time ago.

I was trying to court a girl a while back, she had a boyfriend. I don't know what was going through my head. We spent a lot of time together around school. This was back when I first fucked up my schooling in Graphic Design. Her name doesn't really matter except to talk about psychosis. I went to her house one night and hung out with her and her friend. I drank a little and had any empty mickey in my pocket by morning.

In the morning (it was Sunday) I wanted to go to church so I went to the closest church that was right nearby. It ended up being a Mormon church.

I remember they sat me down and probably gave me the schpeel of what they believe. I remember I openly and vocally "I don't believe in organized religion."

A strange memory yes and quite a tangent but that's what my writing voice seems to be in this novel attempt. The point being my disagreement with organized religion goes pretty far back.

I can't really pinpoint the exact timing that I eventually gave up on religion. It was probably a gradual process of life just turning me towards that direction.

So if I already gave up on religion what did I give up a week and a half ago?

I think I gave my obsessiveness to understand religion. My obsessiveness to make my own system of belief that I could try and popularize. How ironic and hypocritical to someone opposed to religious authority to try and create a system of belief others adopt.

It goes full circle back to the very beginning of this novel attempt as well. I've given up on reading book after book on Christianity trying to fit my square beliefs into the paradigm of Christianity. I have given up thinking I just have to finish a book. In fact if you're bored with reading this I implore you to put it down and write your own book. Be creative, be free, love yourself.

I've given up thinking that I have to fit my puzzle piece into the big picture of Christianity. I need not try and make my opinions and beliefs line up with popular systems of belief. I believe that was what I was trying to do.

Because I have such a weight on me of growing up and being raised a Christian I feel that I have to somehow fit my puzzle piece into Christianity. I have to somehow make my all my so called heretical beliefs with Christianity.

It also goes back to how I feel I should be a Christian to make my parents happy.

I need to accept that I don't need to be obsessed with being a Christian or acting as a Christian.

I will believe what I believe and not worry whether or not I can be called a Christian.

I am still wrestling with whether or not I can be called a Christian, yes, but I am learning to not let it stress me out and be something of so much importance.

If I want to be labeled a Christian, it is my personal choice. It is not going to be something to wear my back to appeal to popular opinion of belief.

Right now as we speak I could write like Bertrand Russel the reasons why I am not a Christian. Right now as well I could write a long deep chorus of why I am a Christian. Is this cognitive dissonance? Possibly.

It's just where I am at.

So yes. I have given up on religion, I am giving up on my obsession with religion (its like trying to quit smoking), and I am giving up on trying to be a Christian.

There is no reason in my mind to think that anything about our minds, our thoughts, our questions isn't succumb to some sort of fragility.

What does this mean in relation to beliefs?

Can a fragile mind actually properly believe something in strength?

When we believe things with a fragile mind how can sure of what is truth?

Beliefs to me are fragile. Beliefs are under constant bombardment of influence from the environment around you. Beliefs are engrained into you as you grow up and are raised to think a certain way.

I have a hard time believing what I was taught in church. I was taught the importance of belief in Christ as the redeeming salvation from the terrible torment of hell.

How can such a terrible consequences be placed on something so fragile as belief?

66666666666666666666666666666666666666

I don't remember waking this morning. I obviously did my usual chores with my mom taking care of the animals in the barn.  I remember crawling back into bed and waiting for the time we would be leaving. I was going to see a counselor today. Her name is that of the mother on a popular television cartoon series.

It was my first session with the usual questions that try their best to get a snapshot of where a person is at.

I wouldn't say I am in desperate need of counseling like some people would find themselves. I am just at a plateau in my life; in between possible modes of action. Yesterday, I was a mental case and tomorrow I'll be a graphic design student. We're not speaking in literal days to you young earth creationists.

After the counseling session I went and bought a book at a small bookstore that is run by volunteers and supports a local library. I picked up Steppenwolf by Herman Hesse. A friend I worked with at a restaraunt who also worked at a men's shelter recommended it to me a long time ago. The themes so far in the book seem to be that of loneliness.

Even now I recognize that I am lonely. I spend my time on the internet waiting for friends to come online just to shoot the shit.

After the bookstore I went to a mental health drop in centre called Friends and Neighbours.

I usually spend my time chain smoking and not really saying much.

I have been smoking way too much lately. I tried to cut down when I was in fear of not having enough to last me; alas I now have money to indulge in buying more and am back to chainsmoking.

Even though I was surrounded by people today I recognize that I am lonely.

I spend most of my time doing absolutely nothing.

I have tons I could be doing. I just don't have the motivation to do so.

I rarely shower as I don't actually don't do anything to justify it.

I showered today because I'll be seeing friends in the next literal days coming. I'll be seeing a hardcore show all by my lonesome than meeting up with my old flame Val. After that I'm going to see my friend brendon in his new place of residence in Peterborough. Hardcore is a form of music that is fast, aggressive and probably would rip your face off. Val is a goddess who is frankly speaking opening a new leaf in her life. She recently broke up with her boyfriend and experiencing for the first time in a while being single. Brendon is more than just a linecook, but i fail to describe him any other way except as my best friend since childhoo.

Other than seeing some people today at Friends and Neighbours and getting to see friends over the next few days which I am looking forward to; I recognize that I am desperately lonely.

I have made a silent vow to myself to be single the rest of my life.

A dream has awoken old feelings of the warmth of being with somebody; actually living with someone. The dream puts into question how well I can really handle a life of singlehood; a life of possible loneliness.

I've only recently become to see myself as lonely when I find myself complacent with what to do with myself during my times being alone. I wait until friends come online. I enjoy the times I can call up good friends and just talk.

I posted online the lyrics to a song by Pedro the Lion.

    Love well young man, while you still can.
    Once your leaves turn you won't love again.

    In time memories fade, senses numb,
    one forgets how it feels to have loved completely, completely.
...
    Is it special when you're lonely,
    will you spend your whole life in a studio apartment with a cat for a wife?

These words haunted me when I was in a relationship with Val as I realized at darker times in my thinking that I lusted for a life of loneliness. I lusted for a life of singlehood. These times were dark because I was desperately and madly in love with her.

Stranger are the darker times when I would see a picture of us together and it would seem like a foreign object, and alien artifact, something from another dimension.

I hate to be so honest about such dark things in fear she'll actually will read these words.

I think and hope that Val understands why what happened, happened. I still love her dearly and as the cliche goes hope the best for her.

In a recent conversation with her, she being really close to me confronted me about something that could be a problem for myself. She really knows me and knows the workings of my head.

She confronted me on my obsession with religion. I am one in the past to admit fully and openly that I am obsessed with religion; particularly the one having to do with Jesus Christ. Not that I haven't dabbled in reading into other religions and personally gleaned much truth from them.

She really was wondering what benefit to my life is there in my constantly wrestling and struggle with religion. I admit that my attempts at researching and studying into the origins of christianity, the meaning of who christ is, my fight against traditional fundamentalist, my delving into nihlistic athiesm; it all has been a strenuous battle for me.

I have been trying to define God. I've been trying to put him in a box. This is ultimately an impossibility.

I don't know how else to explain but I've been holding on tightly to something, some sort of angst against religion. I've been trying to rationalise the irrational. I've been trying to make sense of something that is extremely subjective.

Religion is ultimately bullshit. Why am I so obsessed with it?

Ultimately although I call it bullshit, I can't let go of certain key concepts.

I still believe in God. Who he is? I don't fucking know.

I am trying my best to let go of religion. The crappy catchphrase that is steeped in christianese goes "It's not about religion, it's about relationship."

They believe that even though they are a religion, and as much as they try to deny that, they believe that they are about a relationship with God.

Although I see this as a silly argument of self-denial, I do agree with the silly catchphrase.

From now I will merely pray to a God who is undefined.

I won't believe he is an angry vindictive rulemaker. I won't believe he sends people to hell.

I'll pretend he is actually listening. Maybe he or she really is listening, I really don't fucking know.

Am I giving up questioning? Am I giving up my search for truth? Am I giving up an obsession that gives birth to learning? Am I giving up honest searching? Am I settling for second best?

I can answer no to these questions.

I am giving up my struggle. I am giving up my scratching at a wall trying to dig through. I am giving up trying to measure the unmeasurable.

I still will search for truth but I will do it organically. I will do it with faith that if I go with the flow of the river, the river will lead me somewhere.

I will still have questions come up. I will still have struggles at times.

I am letting go though of my angst and heartache.

I am no longer going to be bound by an unquenchable thirst.

For the time being I'm giving up on reading book after book on Christianity.

I'm going to read works such as Steppenwolf that deal with the human condition emotionally.

I am still going to search but I am going try to search through experience and self exploration.

I feel good in giving up something that was holding me back mentally.

I am giving up an obsession and picking up a life of freedom.

I am going to enjoy life and try and make the best out of myself.

I am going to try and start doing more around the farm; a whole lot more.

I am going to love myself and put myself first as the only way I can to eventually serve others.

im fucking messed up and i found a way to write a journal entry

god forgive me for my sins let me no perish, but let me live

i live for you, if i can. right now its really hard

maybe surrender is the answer

lord i love you so much and i believe in your compassion

maybe i can 'blah blah blah' about you filling me with your goodness

but what i truly want is your goodness in reason

i want to know your thoughts

what is going through your head

i dont get reality

i dont get the bible

is that a stumbling block?

the bible is my stumbling block

a little christianese for you

i dont know

god give me the spirit of isdom

i need to be learned

i need to be wise

these are my longings

i feel arrogant in asking but ill ask anyways

increase my intelligence

but also increase my wisdom

Lord show me the way to truth

and mind the guardians of confusion and paradox

im currently trying to dodge them

i love you lord

i do, i mean it.

your compassion means everything to me

dont let it stop flowing because of some incident of sin

let it flow on me

i praise you lord,

you are everything to me

i love you

teach me to walk in your wisdom

i love you lord

teach me discipline

rules judgment and all that bullshit

but in your eyes how do you see things?

because i want to know

i want your wisdom and reason.

not mine.

maybe that is the kierkegaardian leap

who knows?

i love you lord

peace

blessings

shalom

amen
 
truly truly

amen

Having taken up the daunting task of a search for philosophical and spiritual truth (truth pertaining to metaphysical and religious ideas) I feel led by my spirit to summarize the ideas that will be the foundation of my thinking. This is in no way an attempt to solidify and cement the idea of truth with a capital "T". This is merely an attempt at creating a clearer picture for myself of my own personal perspective on truth. This is also a way of creating a snapshot for future reference when trying to gauge my own personal progression in my search. I stress this is deeply personal and not meant to be a manifesto or creed preached to a mass audience. I will only share it with people as a way for further correction or even rebuking, if necessary. I am learning. I am on a path in search of knowledge (gnosis). I don't make claim to have any certain truth. I only make claim to my inadequacy as a thinker and hope only for further growth and refinement.

1) My current knowledge is inadequate. When seeking things out and searching for further truth I find myself hitting road blocks of the daunting tasks of endless areas of possible study. I have come to admit to myself that what I know is merely not enough.

2) Religious and Spiritual truths are subjective. There is no way to know truly which doctrines or dogmas are correct. Certainty in such areas is merely certainty of an essence of correctness - not a certainty of the barest details. Certainty that people claim to have is a certainty that they are in the right neighbourhood - but they will never find the correct house where truth lives. I affirm that knowledge of religious things is forever going to be one of agnosticism. I contradict myself however in saying that I do seek a perfection of knowledge and somewhat of a certainty. I recognize though that this certainty will only be of being in the right neighbourhood but never finding the correct house where truth lives. I search for a certainty of a mere essence of truth.

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. (1 Corinthians 13:12)

3) I do not know what I believe about the one known as Jesus Christ. I claim no idea whether or not he is a historical figure. I don't claim to know if the writings of him are true. What I do claim is that the idea of Christ; the idea of God becoming man and being a roadway for humans to God is what I find truth in. I do not claim to have found a capital "T" truth in Christ although my heart and spirit begs it. Jesus is special in my heart but that may not be based in rational thinking. This thinking may be merely in the fact it is who I grew up into believing is God. I have yet to define the image of Christ rationally.

4) I believe in a mythology. It helps me express my world view. Not that myths are particularly true, rather they express an essence of truth that I can feel and resonate with. This truth that I feel and resonate with is not merely confined to the Bible. I have found it in the Bhagavad Gita, the writings of the Gnostics, and even in popular media such as the Silmarillion, Fight Club, the Matrix and the Spawn comics.

I feel the right on my own authority to steal truth from many different sources. I recognize this can run into the problems of taking things out of context and also inconsistencies between the varying systems from which I pirate truth. This is something I recognize as a problem and will seek to work out.

5) I am anarchist towards any spiritual or religious authority. I am a monarchy unto myself when it comes to my search for truth. This being said I also respect others to have the same spirit of being an authority unto themselves. I will respect and seek out the opinions of others to help further shape my search for truth but reserve my own final judgments on what I believe. I do not believe when in matter of religion and philosophy one person being in any sort of authority over another. I respect religious organization as only a collective of ideas and never a final authority on matters of truth, religion, and philosophy. If I ever come into the position of having someone willing to disciple me in my search for truth, I respect their own authority only as one equal to my own.

With these five statements I recognize I could be completely wrong. I however under my own authority believe I have found somewhat a foundation for my beliefs moving forward. I only hope to learn where I am wrong and become more clear in areas where I am may be right. 

if you haven't noticed or i haven't made it known to you - I've gotten back into God. I can't say it more eloquently, I can merely state that I'm starting to return to a belief in God and yes religion.

Religion is such a nasty word and many people would say that I shouldn't stress religion, I should stress relationship with God. However, I don't like this distinction as belief in God whether or not you like it is a religious concept.

When it comes to religion, things get messy and nasty, yes? Suddenly we're searching out into the great unknown that is beyond our material senses. We are seeking answers outside of what is self-evident.

The things of God are not self-evident. You can refute me on this but I must make it clear that I don't believe God is going to come down out of heaven and show me the correct way to practice religion. He's not. He's supposedly left that up to men and women who are fallible and filled with fragility.

The key word I am getting to is uncertainty.

Whatever definition of God you have, it is completely uncertain whether or not that definition of God is true. There is no magic marker that comes out and highlights your life as the one that is following the true definition of God.

It is all very subjective.

There is no way to differ between one person's experience of God and another's. Many different people of different faiths and variations of faith; endless lines of denominations all experience God.

They all believe different things on a very open-ended concept: God.

With that said, you can agree with me or disagree. You merely support the fact that it's subjective.

Belief in God according to Kierkegaard is a leap of faith. This major revelation that belief in God is a leap of faith came to me before I even read Kierkegaard. I blogged about it speaking about how my rational mind of reason has to make a huge leap, almost the distance across an ocean. *

With this leap of faith I am now tearing apart the Bible in search of truth.

Why the bible?

Because that is what I have been brought up upon and the very foundation I hope to strengthen or dissipate. It's the common ground I have with other believers of faith. It is the cornerstone of belief for many people - and other people are they who will help shape and define my belief. Being a common ground it is something I need to research and pull apart and understand whether or not I want it to be a common ground in the first place.

The uncertainty with the Bible that remains and always remains is whether or not it truly is God inspired. Whether or not it is merely a political machine concocted to create a religion rather than an experience with God.

An example of this uncertainty is as follows.

I am heavily interested in Gnostic ideas. Not because of scholarly research, no because I merely read the texts and resonated with them. I left the scholarly research to others who support the Gnostics as a viable sect of Christianity that was wiped out not merely because of truth rather politics. This is all subjective and may or may not be true. Again, uncertainty.

I have no clue about the early church and how they came to decide what got put into the New Testament but I am searching.

The example being that I have been searching for the truth about gnosticism and I found myself looking at a verse in Collossians.

Colossians 2:8-9 (English Standard Version)

 8See to it that no one takes you captive by(A) philosophy and(B) empty deceit, according to(C) human tradition, according to the(D) elemental spirits[a] of the world, and not according to Christ. 9For(E) in him the whole fullness of deity dwells(F) bodily,

It's very use of the word fullness (pleroma) is a gnostic term. This is a case of direct knock at gnosticism, if I am connecting the dots right. Again there is uncertainty.

I found it interesting that the writer Paul would do a direct knock at gnosticism. There is a gnostic teacher Valentinus who claims to have had direct gnostic knowledge passed down to him from one of Pauls disciples. **

This would seem like an open and shut case, but it's not. Because the very authorship of that book is in question whether or not Paul actually wrote it. It's part of what is called deutero-pauline epistle. ***

So it's very possible that someone with a political agenda to wipe out the Gnostics wrote that in there.

Again there's uncertainty.

Because no one is certain who wrote any of this.

This is why I stress the uncertainty of belief. This small example shows how you can do as much lay man attempts at scholarly research as possible with the material you're given and yet still remain uncertain.

When it comes to belief in God I am uncertain.

Does this leave me at agnosticism?

Does this leave me a heretic for not being certain?

I don't really care for labels but I do care for the search for truth. When this search for truth exits the realm of self-evidence and enters the realm of religion and mysticism we can only be uncertain.

 * wings of fire below.
 ** http://www.gnosis.org/library/valentinus/Valentinus.htm
 *** http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/corinthians/deutero.stm

lord,

i forgive you for making me bipolar.

lord.

i forgive you for making my brother autistic.

is this my only defense against your existence?

maybe if i define you as all-powerful and in control?

you are in control aren't you lord?

then what is mental illness?

should i throw out your definition of hell

because some of us, our beliefs are born fragile?

i think i love you lord,

but there's so many unsanwered questions i have lord,

i just don't get it.

why did you send your son to die?

is that what it takes for you to be able to forgive us?

is that what your infinite mercy dictates?

that you must die?

brutally at the hands of your creation?

it makes no sense to me lord!

i just don't get it

if you have a holy spirit,

send it to me.

cause right now i am in real need of some help,

i forgive you for being slow,

slow to reply

slow to act

slow to prove yourself,