Comments on: In defense of God

By: Gordon Shaughnessy

Gordon Shaughnessy — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:23:37 +0000

We know today that all Religion including Christianity is only made manifest through myth, metaphors and allegory. A literal expression of all of this is the Bible.
Most Christian scholars today will show and explain how this “book” is not to be taken in a literal way, but symbollicaly pointing to a real esoteric meaning buried within.
Contemporary theology has put it in a most powerful way, when it speaks in the following context: “The mythos is a fundamental archetype in the human psyche. Many believe it was planted there by the Ground or Mind of the Universe, the mystery, the sacred, yes the divine other that “we” have called “God.’
For me, while not big on doctrine or dogma anymore, i still sense this divine consciousness within.
I believe we are really at that turning point in our expression of the sacred. Regardless of how limited any expression of such can ever be.

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:50:19 +0000

I agree with your article wholeheartedly. I have one minor quibble about your sentence which is quoted just above. As I understand what I’ve read about the wave/particle duality, the electron (among other sub-atomic “things”), is ALWAYS both wave and particle. It doesn’t “change”: it simply appears as wave or particle depending upon the nature of the experiment being used to view it. The underlying reality is always beyond our normal sense of understanding, thus “miraculous.”

By: Allan Jones

Allan Jones — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:39:51 +0000

“I see evidence of the holy, the miraculous in the fact that an electron can be both a particle or a wave at the same moment and change depending upon who is looking at it.”

Lynne McTaggart

I see evidence of the natural world that science can explain, or will in the future

By: Steve Crawford

Steve Crawford — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:13:54 +0000

We are all human beings. Some of us have religious experiences, some of us do not. Many of us believe in God, many of us do not. We are one people, one planet, with many problems to work through. This work is worth doing whether I believe it is sacred or not.

By: John Cowart

John Cowart — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:11:15 +0000

Good day Lynn.

An interesting view, though the title makes me wonder a bit. Defending God?

It does not seem that you feel this way which is good yet confuses me all the more in the choice of words. I’d rather say God has no need of defence of any sort.

As it’s said God is not mocked. To my mind that means more than one should not mock nor attempt to mock God for any fear of retribution or the like.

Simply that God is not mocked for no matter what power we think we may hold. Being part of God means God cannot be mocked. God is too much a part of each and everyones own life to be truely mocked no matter how hard we try at times to do so.

We may mock ourselves at times. But even then it’s only at one small part of our own make up and not something we generally take very serious or we’d not do it.

God being mocked is rather a funny idea to my way of thinking.

And to the folks that think God would truely need to be defended? Well. I don’t laugh at the idea. But it surely brings a smile to my face.

May we all together create a joyous new year in each day that comes as we slowly create for ourselves and our fellows a new heaven and earth.

Blessed be.

John.

By: Maat

Maat — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 22:29:20 +0000

Science and religion can work hand in hand as both are from the same source.
Scientist recognise that all things in the universe vibrate at particular frequencies; colours, solids, liquids, thoughts, everything. The Bible describes this as the Word. ..”the Word was with God and the Word was God”.
In any language a word is a sound, a frequency. What scientist realise is that these frequencies can be manipulated to interact with and have effect on other objects, even by humanity. (Think radio/TV)
What religion tries to show us is that we are a part of this vibration that is God and that our purpose is to develop our spiritual understanding so that we can also interact with and through this gift to the fulfilment of control of our true nature.
There is a spiritual development program called the Tree of life that gives a reader step by step instruction on how to attain this understanding. It takes away much of what we call mystery from the process and enables us to experience, in our everyday life, the growth of our spiritual self.
See if you can get hold of a copy of the Meter Neter.

Peace

By: Rev. Richard Matthews

Rev. Richard Matthews — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 22:20:17 +0000

My friend John is a physicist. He’s a good one, a bright one. He never ceases to amaze me with his grasp of the very small, and the very large, of the universe, of chemicals, of tissue and sinew, of energy. He is an unwavering seeker of truth, from wherever it may come. He knows he won’t always like it, but he also knows he must remain open.

He confided something to me recently. He told me that among his colleagues, almost none of them pay any attention to the ramblings of what they call ‘the atheist fundamentalists.’ Why not? I asked. Because, he said, they don’t often get to see what we see, to peer into the mysteries that we do. They speak as if they actually know something when, in fact, they know nothing. We as physicists are in a much better position to challenge the religious superstitions of the world than are the pragmatic (so-called) unbelievers. And most of us, he went on, don’t buy into the doctrines and dogmas of the organizations. However, almost to a person, even though many of us wouldn’t admit it publicly, we know we touch daily a mystery that is even beyond the word itself. We are continually surprised by the little tricks and turns that Nature(?) showers upon us. And most important, we’re surprised how willing the universe is to reveal itself to us when we find the right combinations of equations and formulae. It’s as if it is saying ‘look here.’ We look and often find; then we discover it is a beginning, not an ending. On it goes.

My friend does not believe in the literal God, the one of the Books. But he insists that physics itself and quantum physics in particular prove that we as a species have only touched a very small portion of this thing we call truth. And what little evidence we have collected so far only serves to reinforce an underlying Power, a connection of some kind, that keeps it all operating according to Law. Good Law.

So, what are we that we can even think about this mystery? It would appear that we ourselves are the mystery. What fun!

Thanks for your insights, Lynne. Your book was a great read!

By: Leif

Leif — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 05:20:23 +0000

I am excited to see so many opinions, of so many informed people talking about the same thing . In my mind what it is you are talking about here is the consciousness revolution.
Having delved into the Bible, Buddhism, Quantum Physics, etc. as well as recent works from authors like Lynne, I have come across one idea which I cannot logically dispute. With the progression of time, and advancements in technology we seem to be pushing the collective consciousness to a breaking point.
This seems to be a necessary event, in order to bring about the paradigm shift that we all desperately want. Surely we should cease are wanting and start embodying a degree of all the ideas here. Like co-creating with the universe, we like minded people should continue to bounce ideas around like you fine people here are doing. ‘Forsake not the council of your brethren’ as the bible says.
Frequently I am striving to be present , and not think in terms of past or future. However, in regard to the world/ political climate/ collective consciousness, I am of the opinion it is imperative that folks such as ourselves continue to meditate, and communicate these ideas to their grand conclusion .
We are pioneers in the evolution of mankind and the universe. I think Jesus came to break down the conscience barrier, and we should hop on board. Thanks Lynne, and lots of Love to you all. Owlabroad@gmail.com

By: Carl Dietz

Carl Dietz — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:33:30 +0000

I have to mention to folks from time to time that ideas and opinions are often connected only by a thread of hope. The opinions of any rational person on any subject outside the set of all rational thinking are as irrational as the set of irrational ideas.

Look at it another way. Science is a field of study based on empirical trial and error. It is not more than that. Scientists are defined by that fact. Any matter of faith can utilize any scientific discovery, but only to describe a faith metaphorically. The trouble begins when a matter of science is used to support a faith.

Best practice living is to simply draw as few conclusions as possible until you are really good at living. Then take a few chances and use your conclusions to define your art.

Carl

By: Bill Barrows

Bill Barrows — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:14:22 +0000

Greetings Lynne,

A great column, in my opinion.

I agree that the real paradigm is far more complex and subtle than either fundamentalism or extreme rationalism encompasses.

I wonder how well we’re equipped, as human beings at this stage of evolution, to fully understand the “nature of life” and our own true place in the continuum.

As Ernest Holmes, 20th century author of “Science of Mind”, said, “There is a power in the universe greater than we are – and we can use it.” Through our “spiritual” practices (or intentional energy manipulations) we can certainly, at some times in some ways, affect the course of our life events.

I think anyone who makes any absolute pronouncements, fundamentalist or rationalist, betrays an ignorance of the fact that the earth revolves around the sun and not vice versa.

Hapy Holidays and keep your thoughts coming,

Bill Barrows, Vancouver, WA