Realspiritik

Thanks, Norm. For me, Jesus' take on the Shema (and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength) and his repetition of the core law about loving your neighbour from Leviticus 19 are the essence of Jesus' teachings (Mark 12). (I know this isn't an original insight, but it's always worth repeating). Christianity has really backed itself into a corner on the question of the soul -- "the complete package," as you describe it. I love your nutshell response: "We do not bend, fold or mutilate the soul." As I researched the history of different theories of the soul -- and believe me, there are a lot more theories out there than most people realize! -- I began to see that early Christian theologians who were arguing for the orthodox Pauline stance (the faction of early Christianity that eventually "won," so to speak) were doing exactly that -- bending, folding, and mutilating the understanding of the soul (the holistic core self). For my thesis, I focussed on Tertullian, the first Christian theologian to write in Latin as opposed to Greek (that we know of to date). I downloaded a translation of Tertullian's late 2nd century/early 3rd century Treatise on the Soul, and pasted it into WordPerfect so I could do word searches, etc. A word count revealed the treatise is about 50,000 words long -- the length of a book! This treatise, along with some other material by the same theologian, are the source of the earliest defined statements about Original Sin in the orthodox Western Church. (These ideas are nascent, but not fully developed, in Paul's own letters.) You would not believe the philosophical contortions Tertullian goes through to try to persuade others about the depravity of the soul! Interestingly, a couple of hundred years later, another theologian from the same region -- Augustine of Hippo -- became a big fan of Tertullian's writings. As you read the documents written century after century by Pauline Christians, what you see (if you're looking at what's actually written there instead of what you think is written there) is adoration of Paul. The Apostle, this. The Apostle, that. (Everyone knows who you mean when you simply say "The Apostle.") Paul's letters are used constantly as proof texts for this miserable, depressing, demeaning understanding of the soul. Meanwhile, the words attributed to Jesus are mentioned much less frequently, and the Gospel of Mark is quoted least of all over the centuries, because the Gospel of Mark (don'cha know ) has always been a troublesome, difficult book for Pauline Christians. You know what the problem is with the Shema? Nothing. Nothing at all. It's an absolutely wonderful prayer that allows individuals to trust in their own worthiness to be in full relationship with God. Implicit in the prayer -- screaming from the core of the prayer -- is the outrageous idea that each of us, as individuals, has both the power and the responsibility to reach out to God in holistic, courageous ways. (As Jesus once did.) When you stick with the wisdom of the Shema and related teachings, there's no need at all for Paul's "sin, separation from God, sacraments, and salvation" model (the "4 S's" as I call it for simplicity's sake). Needless to say, this reality creates a whole new set of problems for those who are willing to look at the history honestly. Best! Jen

Sorry . . . I'm a bit unclear . . . when you say "the opposite of that," which "that" were you thinking of? In your experience (which I deeply respect) "any one of us would have sacrificed themselves for the others in a heartbeat, with barely a second thought." This is what I mean by the experience of "finding yourself." Finding yourself means trusting your own heart, trusting your own compassion. Once you've found this trust in your core nature, it's a straightforward matter to sacrifice yourself for others with barely a second thought. It's possible that at the same time you were feeling a core sense of trust and courage, some of your mates were feeling the same way. When two or more people come together to share their sense of trust and courage with each other, there's a heightened sense of being part of a whole. A whole family or group. It doesn't matter what the situation is. It can happen as easily in a submarine as in a touchy-feely campfire singalong. What matters is your ability to bring your entire core self into the situation to do what's right. When individuals find themselves in these life or death situations, they have to make a choice. They have to make a choice in the briefest flicker of a moment about who they think are. They have to decide whether they're going to be their worst selves (selfish, non-altruistic survivors) or their best selves (trusting, courageous team players). What you choose will be reflected in your body's biological response in the immediate short term. If you choose to go purely with your "worst self," your body will respond by kicking in with huge boluses of stress hormones (epinephrine, norepinephrine, cortisol). If you choose to go purely with your "best self," your body will also throw in lots of neurotransmitters such as oxytocin, vasopressin, serotonin, and melatonin, which help you process your choice to be trusting and compassionate towards your mates. Hence the physical sensation of warmth. For most people in most ordinary situations, the choices they make lie somewhere between the two extremes, So what they "feel" in terms of physical sensations lies somewhere in the middle. Not really "cold," but not really "warm," either, at an emotional, physical, and spiritual level. In our language and literature, we instinctively use words like "cold" to mean selfish and uncaring. And we use words like "warm" to mean caring and compassionate towards others. There's probably a sound biological basis for this choice of words. Best, Jen

Neon, I'd like to make sure I understand your point correctly. Are you saying the traditional understanding of God is the problem, or are you saying that God is the problem? Are you saying that you yourself believe that God (if he exists, in your view) must be either incompetent or evil? Please clarify.

I appreciate the honest and heartfelt nature of your posts. Thank you. Have you considered the possibility that the two experiences you describe here were not experiences of self-transcendence ("losing" yourself) but were instead experiences of "finding yourself" -- or, to put in a different way, "entering the kingdom of the heavens" as Jesus once tried to describe it? "Finding yourself" is an experience of deep trust and compassion and divine love. It's about seeing more clearly than you've ever seen before the reality that the "other" -- each person around you -- is a full and complete being, a being who is separate from you, a being who is unique, a being who is entirely worthy of your respect, a being who is equal to you in the eyes of God. In that moment of clarity, when you step off the ladder of spiritual ascent, and understand that you are neither better nor worse than any other living creature, you find the courage to see yourself as the compassionate being you really are. The self is not lost in these moments of clarity. The self who understands trust and courage and faith is found. The ground beneath your feet becomes more solid than it's ever seemed before -- so solid it may not be immediately recognizable as that thing we call courage. But that's what it feels like when you enter the mysterious place called the heart. You ask, "Is the lack of suffering in modern society preventing us from rising up the staircase?" I see tremendous suffering in modern society, perhaps more than we've ever known as a species, because of our refusal to teach our children how to find their way into the heart, into the place where we can know ourselves and know each other. The journey of knowing the heart begins within the self (so from this point of view is driven by the individual) but can't expand to its full potential without the willing aid of others (a group dynamic, in other words). So, as you say, it's both. Jen

Since we seem to be talking about evolution here . . . the latest issue of Scientific American (July 2012) has a cover story about the evolution of cooperation. The article, called "Why We Help" by Martin Nowak, says this in the "In Brief" box: It has always struck as important that the theological doctrine of natural evil so closely resembles the theory of natural selection in its purest "dog-eat-dog" form (the form which, until recently, has been the dominant view among biologists, according to Dr. Nowak). The honest truth is that reproductive success for single individuals is not the sole factor that drives all life on Planet Earth, as many recent researchers have been showing with their work on the role of cooperation in all species. The question we should be asking ourselves is not "why is there suffering?" but instead "why does the altruistic spirit always seem to rebuild itself?" (to paraphrase Dr. Nowak). Any sound theory about the nature of humanity and the nature of our relationship with God MUST account for both ends of the spectrum of human behaviour, not just the nasty bits at the psychopathic extreme. We all know there's suffering during our lives on Planet Earth. I don't think anyone disputes this reality. But the parts that hurt aren't the only parts that exist. It's not reasonable or fair to pretend that altruism and selflessness aren't real, measureable forces that lead to change in our world. Altruism and selflessness and friendship with others for the sake of friendship (instead of for the sake of selfish genes) are real, and they're being practised every day by worker ants and lions and vampire bats (to name three examples given by Dr. Nowak). It's part of our hard-wiring, and, as people of faith, we should be asking ourselves why. Why are we hard-wired this way, and what can we learn from this scientific reality that will help us heal and build our relationships with all of God's good creation? There's so much that we, as human beings, don't know and can't know while we're here. But I know we can help each other learn from our own mistakes, and in my view this is one of the highest forms of cooperation we can choose. It sure beats the heck out of "dog-eat-dog" survival. Jen

This is an essay about my experience of the soul within Creation. I wrote it earlier this spring on my blog, but it expresses what I most want to say about the soul in the way I most want to say it. I call it "Trekking With God on Planet Earth." ______________________________________________ Today is Easter Sunday, a day when many people around the world reflect on the mysteries of resurrection, healing, transformation, and new growth. I'd like to join this discussion by sharing with you a powerful moment of insight and poetry that came to me one day last fall when I was poring over a book given to me by my son. The day he brought the book over, he was coming because I was hosting a birthday lunch for my sister. He showed up with a card and present for my sister, but he also arrived with a gift for me -- a book he thought I'd really enjoy. And he was right. (Male intuition at work.) It's called Across the Tibetan Plateau: Ecosystems, Wildlife, and Conservation by Robert L. Fleming, Jr., Dorje Tsering, and Liu Wulin (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2007). It's filled with beautiful photos and informative text about successful efforts to conserve habitats and animal species in Tibet. Learning about these ecosystems is my idea of good time. I've had a lifelong fascination with the wonders found in nature. The chapter about the wet southeast of Tibet (who knew it wasn't all mountains and high desert?) caught my attention with the truth it tells about all Creation. This is the experience of life I'd like to share with you. Through the southeast region of Tibet flows a river called the Yarlung Tsangpo, a river which has carved one of the deepest gorges on Earth. At the bottom of this gorge, the biome is tropical, with wild bananas and bamboo and plentiful rain. At the top of the peaks that lift above the gorge, the zone is perpetual ice and snow. If you start a journey on the Himalayan heights and walk down to the river, you'll pass through "five biological zones of flora and fauna within a distance of 60 kilometers (37 miles) (page 18)." In a distance that can be hiked in two or three days (if you're in good shape) you'll experience mountain-tundra, then cold-temperate, then warm-temperate, then subtropics, and finally the lush tropics of the river valley. Wisely, this experience has been preserved within the Medog Nature Preserve. Vastly different biomes hover next to each other here in a way we don't normally experience on Planet Earth. Usually we have to travel hundreds of miles to experience a completely different habitat (at least, in Canada we have to!). But in this mysterious corner of Tibet, we can traverse many of Asia's natural wonders within a few short miles. It's deceiving. Where does one biome end and another begin? Where does subtropical turn into warm-temperate? Is there a black-and-white line on the ground, a clear-cut division between one habitat and its neighbouring zone? No. The changes are subtle. The zones blend slowly into each other. All you really notice as you're descending the path is that eventually certain plants and trees become more and more scarce until they finally disappear; yet the loss is accompanied by change and new growth as they're replaced by other equally beautiful (but different) plants and trees. As the vegetation changes, so do the resident populations of birds and animals and insects. Each species lives within the ecosystem it's best suited to. It's natural and harmonious and perfect. The universe we live in, with its vast expanses of space and energy and matter, is a lot like the Nature Preserve in the Yarlung Tsangpo River region of southeastern Tibet. Within God's Creation lie many different ecosystems, many different biomes. But, as a trekker in Tibet would discover in walking the long path, there are few clear dividing lines between these biomes, and no one biome is better than another. All are mutually interdependent. All are equally beautiful -- equally beautiful but very different from each other. When we choose to incarnate here on Planet Earth, we're choosing to live for a temporary time in one of God's many biomes. You can take your pick as to which biome you think we're living in while we're walking through this 3-dimensional corner of Creation. Some would imagine we're living in the lush tropical zone. Some would be convinced we're all at the top of a cold and barren Himalayan mountain. Still others would imagine we're somewhere in the middle. It doesn't really matter where you think we are right now. All you really need to know for sure is that all living creatures on Planet Earth are sharing a temporary journey of discovery and growth in a biome that's different from our usual Home, but no less beautiful and no less important to us than our usual spot in God's Spiritual Kitchen. Life on Planet Earth is filled with beauty and pain and sacredness. But life here doesn't end when our physical lives reach the end of their temporary measure. Like the trees and plants in the Tibetan gorge, there are limits to the places our physical bodies can reach and grow. A fig tree cannot grow in mountain tundra, while the cool-footed rhododendron sags in tropical heat. This is all right with God. There is no judgment from God in the death of the physical body, a death that must arise when it's time for the trekker to pass into the biome where he or she more naturally belongs. Does it hurt when a person makes this trek to another place? Well, that depends. Does it hurt physically to make the trek? Well, no. It doesn't hurt physically. It feels kind of weird (I'm told by my angels) but the journey doesn't last long. God the Mother and God the Father swoop us up in their loving arms and carry us Home almost before we know what's happening. There we're greeted by the people -- the angels -- who are closest and dearest to our hearts. Does it hurt emotionally to make the trek? Well, yes. Of course it hurts to leave behind the people you love. You miss your Earth-time friends as much as they miss you, because the heart is the heart is the heart. So there's a lot of crying on both sides of the path when someone makes the journey Home. There's joy but there's also a lot of grief -- for everyone involved. But the journey has been accomplished and the soul is quietly proud. The soul's senses are widened, the soul's mind is broadened, the soul's heart is filled with the knowledge and memory of love, a love that grows, like rare and precious flowers, in all the nooks and crannies of the strange place we call Planet Earth. Blessings to you at this time of reflection and regrowth. Always remember you are a true child of God, a person-of-soul filled with a courage and devotion you may scarcely remember in your present life, though God remembers. God always remembers. God knows how wonderful you really are.

Thanks, Yvonne. I'm starting to think that saying the word "soul" out loud in a liberal or progressive church is about as safe as shouting "fire" in a crowded nightclub. I, too, believe that care of the soul is the primary objective for any person of faith, Christian or not. We're all in this together, and we all need each other's help to effectively care for the soul. Amazing things start to happen inside a person's own biology when he or she starts to focus on the soul's daily needs for love and belonging, fellowship, open-minded learning, courage, faith, and TRUST. For me, this is what the journey of daily relationship with God is all about. Best wishes, Yvonne! Jen

I'm starting this thread because my heart is breaking to see the emotional and spiritual anguish of hope-filled liberal Christians in the world today. I speak from a viewpoint of deep personal faith in God the Mother and God the Father. For me, faith is "a relationship with God that endures in the absence of sacred texts." I have no common ground with evangelical or fundamentalist Christianity. My values are humanist values: inclusiveness, compassion, egalitarianism, equal access to education and health care, honesty in the face of adversity, and openness to change. My favourite magazines are Scientific American, Scientific American Mind, and Biblical Archaeology Review, which tells you something about the way I view the world. I view the world primarily through the eyes of science and scholarly research. Some of you here know I'm also a practising mystic. I begin and end each day with an intensive mystical practice that helps me find daily insight and healing. Not all mystics fall into the same category. I'm a nature mystic and a channeller. (I won't make any further attempt to explain this here, as I know from experience what will happen.) My work as a mystic and channeller has led me to transformative insights that have changed all my relationships -- my relationship with God, my relationship with others, and my relationship with myself -- in positive and healing ways. The journey has been slow, but the daily experience of Divine Love I now know has been worth every painful moment. In the autumn of 2007, I entered graduate studies in theology at a mainstream liberal Canadian university known for its high academic standards. The progam I entered could have led to ordination had I chosen it. I eventually decided against ordination. Why? Because if were to be ordained I would have to give an oath saying I'm in essential agreement with the doctrines of the United Church of Canada. And I can't in good conscience make such an oath. I'm not in agreement with the church's teachings on the soul. And I'm not in agreement with the church's stated positions on the relationship between Paul and Jesus. These two religious planks are, I believe, the source of the spiritual rot that is currently undermining the ability of regular folk to engage in a full and safe relationship with God. When I submitted my thesis proposal to the faculty committee for approval, I received a startling reply. I was told I could proceed with my proposed research on early church teachings about the soul, but I would have to delete the term "doctrines of the soul" from the title because the church, according to my esteemed professors, has no doctrine of the soul. Well, not to put too fine a point on it, but the position my Christian professors have taken on doctrines of the soul is absolutely untrue. Factually untrue. It may not be convenient for liberal Christians in the third millennium to ask questions about the soul, but it's factually untrue to say that Paul and Jesus weren't talking with all their might about the nature of the soul. It's also factually untrue to say that Christianity has no doctrine of the soul. Christianity clings to several related doctrines about the nature of the soul, all of them based on the teachings of Paul and his orthodox successors, and none of them based on the teachings of Jesus that are attested in the Gospel of Mark and parts of the Letter of James. There's been a lot of talk among liberal and Progressive Christians about the hijacking of Jesus by the far right and the far left. I happen to think Jesus is a pretty tough guy. I'm pretty sure he can survive the constant hijacking. So I'm not worried about rescuing Jesus. I am worried, though -- very, very worried -- about the hijacking of the soul. I'm worried that people of compassionate faith have been bullied mercilessly into believing there's no such thing as the soul. It took me a long time to sort out the difference between religious teachings about the soul and the core scientific reality of the soul. (Yes, I believe the reality of the soul -- core consciousness -- lies within the realm of quantum biology, not religion.) It took me a long time to understand that traditional teachings about the soul have nothing to do with faith or relationship with God, and everything to do with spin-doctoring and political manipulation. The fact that Plato and Aristotle had theories about the soul does not make those theories true. The fact that Paul taught his followers a blended Platonic and apocalyptic theory about the soul does not make his theory true. Within the church, there has been a frightening lack of will to confront the history of these theories, to confront the content and the ramifications of these theories, and to delve more deeply into Jesus' own teachings on the nature of the soul. The damage to people's ability to trust in their own worthiness is incalculable. So what I want to say to people of faith who believe in a loving God and who want to understand Jesus' own teachings is this: you don't have to be afraid to believe you are a good soul. Yes, I know you've made mistakes. And yes, I know you've done some things that make you wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat. But do you think Jesus the man was any different? Do you think he spoke of forgiveness and healing and redemption because your soul is unworthy of relationship with God? No. Jesus spoke of forgiveness and healing and redemption precisely because he could feel the tears of your own soul. The tears of your own good soul, who longs to find the path to peace in a difficult world. The bullying has to stop. Those in this world who choose to see the glass half empty, who choose to reject the possibility of the good soul, are responsible for their own choices, and you are NOT responsible for their choices. You are NOT required to give up your belief in the possibility of healing, forgiveness, and redemption -- the possibility of living from the soul, in other words -- because some other person may be "offended" at the idea that all human beings are equally worthy in God's eyes. You are NOT required to accept theories of the soul that say you're corrupt, or inferior, or burdened with karma, or permanently consigned to the lower regions of heaven or hell. Pessimistic theories such as these are the teachings of human beings who are out of balance, who lack the courage of their own souls, who don't want you to believe you can have a simple, loving, kind, and healing relationship with God. These are the teachings of the bullies. I'll be the first to admit it's difficult to live from the soul. It requires a lot of hard work and a lot of self-honesty. It also requires tremendous teamwork, because no one person has every answer. Not even Jesus. But within you, hidden beneath your anger and blame and pain, are strengths you may not even be aware of, strengths that originate in your heart and soul, strengths that nobody can take away from you once you claim them as the truth of your own soul. I'm not making this up to suit my own modern, optimistic, hope-filled agenda. You can read it yourself in Chapter 12 of the Gospel of Mark, which tells you how to get close to the kingdom of God: being close to God is not about burnt offerings and sacrifices, but loving your God and your neighbours with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength. This is what Jesus taught. If you listen with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength, you'll feel the truth of Jesus' teachings about the good soul deep in your bones. Don't listen to what Paul said (unless, of course, you prefer Paul's glass-half-empty teachings). Paul just didn't like Jesus very much. If Paul had actually agreed with Jesus' teachings, we would see frequent reference in Paul's own letters to the themes of forgiveness, healing, and redemption (not to be confused with salvation). But we don't. Because Paul had an entirely different understanding than Jesus did about the nature of the soul. It's my belief, from careful observation, that it's possible to have religion without soul. It's possible to have ideology without soul. And it's possible to have pure logic without soul. But it's not possible to have faith without soul. Faith is a relationship with God that endures in the absence of sacred texts. Take away the sacred texts and you can still hear God's quiet, hope-filled voice if you listen with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength. Such is the mystery of Divine Love. God bless!

I'm fairly certain, Neon, that I began my comment by referring to "some of the people who post on this site." I don't see any reference in my post to "all bereaved parents." I stand by the point I was trying to make, which is the honest reality that some bereaved parents are able to find love and redemption within the grief. I have no quarrel with anyone who wants to ask difficult questions about why god allows suffering. I wouldn't where I am on my journey if I hadn't asked these questions. You have clearly stated your beliefs, Neon. You've said, "The only two theodicy solutions that have ever made sense to me was either the Gnostic solution, that an evil or incompetent deity created the universe, or the deist solution; that God created the universe and then left it alone and doesn't intervene with the universe at all" Well, I'm not a Gnostic, and have no beliefs in common with any form of Gnosticism. I'm also not a deist, So it's understandable that you and I don't see the theodicy question in similar ways. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Jen

Soma, your words here are very thoughtful and much more nuanced than the earlier statement you made about good and evil. I have worked in the mental health field and have seen difficult challenges in individuals, too. Yes, people commit terrible crimes when they're not balanced. But people can also look their own mistakes in the eye and find healing and redemption. To watch someone undergo the experience of redemption is truly an awesome miracle that is humbling and awe-inspiring. Best, Jen

Ya know, Neon, some of the people who post on this site ARE bereaved parents, and we can still manage to find the love and redemption that are buried deep in the experience of grief. Please do not presume to speak on behalf of all bereaved parents. A couple of Trust's 23 suggestions above have a lot of wisdom in them. The one I know from my own experience to be true is #7: "God is telling us a story. There is not joy without sadness and God is using all frames of reference to tell the story." I don't agree, Soma, that we can't have good unless we have evil. This is your starting point, and you're entitled to your own beliefs as a Christian mystic. But I'm also a practising Christian mystic, and everything in my experience -- including the death of my beloved son -- has taught me that Divine Love is an experience of constant transformation and forgiveness, a constant refusal to choose anything but "the good." Dualistic thinking -- good versus evil -- is one of the greatest causes of human suffering, and we create this pattern of thinking all by ourselves. We create these patterns of dualistic thought, and use them to feel sorry for ourselves, but this doesn't mean God agrees with these ideologies. Is night worse than day? I don't know . . . first give me the date and latitude for the person asking the quesion, because right about now at 90 degrees Sorth there's no day at all. Is that a bad thing? A natural evil? Or is it part of a wider story God is telling us that we don't yet understand? I'm with Dutch: "We are individuality responsible/culpable.God is with us." Amen to that.

I'm curious about the fact that neither of you has mentioned Herschel Shank's hot-off-the-press report about the James Ossuary that's just been posted online at the Biblical Archaeology Review site. The James Ossuary and the ossuaries found in the Talpiot Tomb constitute some of the strongest archaeological evidence we have for the existence of the historical Jesus. The fact that filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici sensationalized the findings from the Talpiot Tomb does not mean the original archaeological rescue operation (carried out by the predecessors of the IAA) was flawed or suspicious in nature. Simcha, along with paleobiologist Charles Pellegrino, first made the claim that the James Ossuary is the tenth ossuary that went missing from the Talpiot Tomb escavation site. I read the original paper that was used in part to foster the belief that the inscription (or part of the inscription) on the James Ossuary was a forgery. (Ayalon, Avner and Miryam Bar-Matthews and Yuval Goren. “Authenticity Examination of the Inscription on the Ossuary Attributed to James, Brother of Jesus.” Journal of Archaeological Science 31 (2004): 1185-1189.) This was poorly executed paper and I'm not sure why it was accepted in a peer-reviewed journal when the authors suggested the calcium carbonate patina was faked by dissolving marine carbonate sediments in warm or hot water and depositing the solution in the inscription. Calcium carbonate has such poor solubility in water that it's hard to imagine how such a faked patina could be successfully accomplished. Have you ever tried to dissolve a bunch of Tums tablets in a glass of hot water? Can you imagine what this would look like if you painted it on an ancient stone bone box? A much more thorough analysis and report of the James Ossuary inscription was carried out in 2005 by Wolfgang Krumbein for the defendants in the forgery trial. It was posted on-line a few years ago on the BAR site. (Krumbein, Wolfgang E. “External Expert Opinion on Three Stone Items.” Biblical Archaeology Society. Sept. 2005. 04 Dec. 2007 <http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/bswbOOossuary_Krumbeinreport.pdf>.) The scientific findings in this report are sound and should be respected. (What's my qualification to say so? I have a graduate degree in Artifact Art Conservation -- the history and chemical analysis and museum conservation of important archeological and historical artifacts. I'm also pretty good at repairing broken kitchen dishes.) Neon, the textual evidence for the history of Jesus and the history of Pontius Pilate are roughly equivalent (New Testament verses plus reports in Josephus). The archeological evidence for the history of Jesus and the history of Pontius Pilate are also roughly equivalent (a very small number of stone inscriptions held in the collection of the Israel Antiquities Authority). Why do you insist we must listen to the slim evidence we have about Pontius Pilate but not the slim evidence we have for the historical Jesus? Why is the body of Pilate evidence "valid" in your opinion but not the body of "Jesus" evidence? Perhaps it's just convenient?

Thought I would pass along a link to an interfaith initiative called "My Fellow American." The site is http://myfellowamerican.us . The goal of the project is to encourage interfaith dialogue and mutual respect towards all, including Americans who happen to be Muslim by religion. People from many different countries, regions, and religions are posting their thoughts on inclusiveness. You need a pretty up to date browser and Flash player to watch the 2-minute video that's posted, but even if you can't watch the video (which I couldn't until recently) the personal stories posted there are very moving. Jen

I have been a vegetarian, but at the moment I am a person who eats a lot of wheat and dairy and nut products, with the occasional meal of chicken, beef, or pork. I'm not fond of fish, and I don't like vegetables all that much. But I love fruit, and eat a lot of fruit. Fresh Ontario strawberries are in season right now. Yum. Jen

If I were writing Sunday School curriculum, I would start with the teachings of Jesus I had listed on the "Which Teachings" forum. OA, would you sometime take time to explain why you believe the teachings you deleted are untrue, so I can understand? For me, the Sunday School should also address pluralism by having some lessons on how other faith traditions see the world. This would be extremely helpful for kids grades 3-6 I believe. We recently changed to a rotational Sunday School model with some materials from Abingdon Press, which I believe is our Methodist publishing house. It spends 6 weeks on TOO little information for the kids to really learn anything, but it's fun! Hi, AllInTheNameOfProgress. I saw this post of yours on another thread in Progressive Christianity, and thought I would comment on it here so as not to take the other thread off track. In the church I attend, the Sunday School teacher for kids grades 3-6 has put together just the kind of program you're suggesting. A few weeks ago, the class (accompanied by parents and interested adult parishioners) visited a nearby synagogue and met with the Rabbi there. Today the class is visiting the Islamic Centre (there is no official mosque in the city we live in). Two weeks ago, the class welcomed two Buddhist teachers to their class. There is also a plan to invite a Native Canadian speaker to talk with the children. Last month, the church as a whole stayed after the Sunday service to share a potluck meal and listen to a speaker from Amnesty International. Many of the children attended this lecture. So they're getting introduced to pluralism and to social justice issues not just through books, but through real people. Jen

Jesus here, AllInTheName. With your question, you're going right to the core of all the disputes that have been going on since the day I walked out of the tomb. Let me say this: as a man, and as a child of God (in the same way that you are a child of God), I was trying to teach others how to have a relationship with God the Mother and God the Father, our eternally loving Divine Parents. I was not -- I repeat, I was not -- trying to set up a religion to myself. Contrary to what John and Paul say, God did not "send" me to "fix" you or anybody else. God did, however, ask me if I would be willing to teach others the Truth about Divine Love. This request did not come until I was a grown man, and it came to me because, like it or not, I was a channeller. You might call me a prophet. However, not all prophets are true channellers. Many prophets are charlatans. The message that gives people hope is the message that God loves them and forgives them. Regardless of whether or not I, Jesus, ever lived, God's love has always been present, and always will be present. I did not bring the love into the world. It was already here. However, I did help other people recognize the love that existed all around them. I helped them understand at a conscious level what they already knew at a deep intuitive level. I say somewhat shyly that I was a role model for others. The way in which I loved God was different from the way in which other people understood God. I did not fear God. I loved God, and wept tears of joy and sadness for the way God loves us. I wept these tears in front of other people. Most of the men didn't "get it" (sorry guys, but real men do cry). The women got it, though, as did the outcasts I treated like full human beings regardless of their gender, disability, or race. Love Jesus May 23, 2008

Jesus, here, AllInTheName. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to elaborate on the important point you've raised about prayer. From my point of view as one of God's angels, the use and abuse of prayer is one of the most troublesome aspects of most people's relationship with God. When I say "abuse of prayer," I am thinking of the millions of individuals who have been taught by the Bible and by their church leaders to pray for everything they "need." There are many people outside Christianity -- for example, those with New Age beliefs -- who also believe that if you set your intent "with the right attitude," the universe must respond with a gift package for you. I'm not suggesting this is your understanding of prayer, AllInTheName, but it's the understanding of many, many others. Part of my responsibility as an angelic mentor is to make sure nobody gets the impression that I, Jesus, am endorsing the kind of abusive prayer that boils down to "God-is-a-gumball-machine-who-is-required-to-give-me-what-I-want." On the other hand, it is vitally important to have a relationship with God, to talk daily to your Divine Parents about what is troubling you, about what is bringing you joy. An important part of Christian praxis should be self-examination, self-questioning, and self-honouring. When you share this practice with God, it is not so much prayer as communication (although there are certainly some spiritual teachers who would ureservedly classify this form of communication as the true essence of prayer). It would be fair to say that, for you and most others on Planet Earth, God knows you better than you know yourself. So you never need to be afraid that God won't know what's troubling you if you forget to bring your concerns to God through communicative prayer. But you're quite right, AllInTheName, when you talk about prayer for self-awareness' sake. It is when you're willing to openly share your vulnerable feelings with God that you gradually start to gain insight into what your feelings actually are. God is there in relationship with you to help you better understand the loving being you are. Blessings to you, now and always. Love Jesus May 22, 2008

Jesus here. As you may know, AllInTheName, I sometimes channel through Jen. And since you're asking what I taught, I couldn't resist answering. Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. A must have. Love your neighbor as yourself. Also a must have. But understanding what I meant when I emphasized this old passage from Leviticus is a true test of discipleship. Do unto others as you would have them do to you. I didn't actually say this. Sometimes it means the same thing as "love your neighbour and your God." Sometimes it doesn't. Followers need to have right attitudes in their hearts; not just on the outside – specific examples include alms giving, prayer, and fasting. Agreement in principle. Please don't use fasting as an example, though -- fasting damages the human brain, and I don't condone it. If you're interested, though, I was a practising vegetarian. Become like little children(humble) – the last will be the first. Yes, with emphasis on the emotional vulnerability and genuine humbleness of young children. Reconcile quickly with those who anger you. Not so much -- depends on whether the other person harmed you accidentally or intentionally. Be cautious when dealing with people who repeatedly harm others on purpose. Do not retaliate; Correct. Non-violence modeled by Jesus even in death Self defence is okay. Love your enemies Love their souls, be cautious around intentional choices that harm -- otherwise you'll become an enabler and forgive,forgive,forgive! Yes! Give to everyone who asks Don't do this -- it will eat you alive. Ask God for guidance when you're deciding whether or not to give. Do not store up treasures for yourself on earth You can't survive without some assets -- the key is balance. – you can’t serve God and wealth I prefer to say 'you can't serve God and Status Anxiety at the same time. Seek to please God Yes.; self-denial Partially true, but don't fall into asceticism. Better to go for self-discipline, which isn't always the same as self-denial; how you live this life DOES make a difference Couldn't say it any better. Don’t judge others Forgive harm without condoning harm– focus on making yourself righteous Yes – don’t cast stones unless you are sinless Sinless? A slippery word -- try to avoid it. Jesus came to seek the “lost”, not throw out the law Some of the Law was not worth keeping – he ate with “sinners” and outcasts That was part of the Law not worth keeping. There is a special place in God’s heart for the underdog in life. Yes! Need to be hearers AND doers of Jesus’ teachings – followers will be known by their actions. Let your light shine before others and keep your zest for life. Yes. Don’t squander your gifts/talents Yes. Don’t be too busy when God calls you Yes. This is where most Christians fall off the Way. Serving God is not always the easy path, and not everyone chooses that path, but it leads to life! Yes. Don’t worry No - there's plenty to worry about, and always pray for what you need No - God knows what you need, even if you don't ask. In any event, what you need often isn't what you pray for. Don’t be a stumbling block for others’ faith. True. Jesus had the power to forgive people for their sins As do you, and faith in Him God relieved their sufferings God loves all of us Yes, and giving us Jesus the Truth about Divine Loveis a great expression of that love! Don't let your religion get in the way of your relationship with God and with other people Slippery -- what do you mean by religion?. Excellent questions, AllInTheName. Look around you for answers from God and God's angels. They are with you. Blessings to you all, Jesus May 15, 2008

P.S. Thanks for reviving this strand, MOW!

MT, when you depart from the script and venture into the territory of your own honest, heartfelt feelings, you sure have some cool, kind, funny things to say. Keep 'em coming. Much love from both Jen and Jesus

Dear MT, Your post above is one of the most honest and heartfelt posts I've read on this site. Ever. Thank you so much for your courage and your honesty, and I mean that with every fibre of my being. You're a fantastic and wonderful person, and I love you. Best, Jen

Hey, MT, it's Jen this time, and I've been pondering what you wrote above. In particular, I've been chewing over the sentence that goes, "The course does not aim at teaching the meaning of love, for that is beyond what can be taught." And I'm thinking, gosh, that just doesn't sound right to me. What the heck else is there except the meaning of love? Not that it's easy to learn, of course. But still . . . isn't the meaning of love what God is always teaching us, whether or not we want to learn? If I were a newbie in the spiritual world, I think I'd be deeply discouraged to be told that the meaning of love is beyond what can be taught. I'd never be able to find the confidence to explore what the meaning of love really is. I'd be afraid to take the risk of loving with all my heart. And there's no doubt it's a risk. It's a risk because as soon as you open your heart wide open, somebody kicks it. So to find the meaning of love, you have to open your heart wide open, but you also have to learn to live with the pain of being hurt by the large number of people (bullies)who actually like to hurt other people's hearts. Learning to cope with the pain is a lot easier if you have a spiritual mentor. Mentoring is teaching. So I guess I'm saying the meaning of love can be taught if you have a wise teacher and a willing student. If I've misunderstood what you've written, please let me know, as I'd like to get these thoughts clear. All the best, Jen

Dear mystic, Nice try, except I think I'd remember that, notwithstanding Jen's musings about what I'm smoking up here. Seriously, though, dear friend, I'd like you to think very deeply about the words you wrote for us here: "This course can therefore be summed up very simply in this way: Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists. Herein lies the peace of God." I agree without reservation that nothing real can be threatened. But to pair this divine truth with the statement that "nothing unreal exists" is hugely problematic. If I had, indeed, written ACIM, I would have said something along the lines of: "Nothing real can be threatened. Your journey as a human being is to peel back the layers of ego to reveal the unthreatened truth. Fear not the truth. Herein lies the peace of God." The Darwinian circuit of the brain (a circuit I've described elsewhere) is frequently terrified of the first truth (that nothing real can be threatened). In fact, the Darwinian circuit of the brain, if it's not functioning properly -- if it's behaving in an unreal fashion -- can make you waste your life fending off the simple truth that God loves you. Many unreal things temporarily exist in the 3-dimensional world you live in. Hatred and prejudice don't exist in the higher quantum universe in any form. In other words, hatred and prejudice are generated exclusively by the misfiring neurons of the Darwinian part of your biological brain. When it's time for you to return Home at the end of your human life, you take with you your memories of love, forgiveness, and gratitude, but you leave behind hatred and prejudice because they're not real at a quantum level. What is real, and what can't be threatened, is divine love, trust, courage, devotion, and gratitude. The challenge, therefore, is to boldly and courageously identify the goals, aspirations, and belief systems that aren't real as far as your soul is concerned. Get rid of the emotional and mental "values" that have no merit in the quantum universe you actually belong to. Ditch all traces of racial or cultural superiority (since these aren't real). Put ideas of gender superiority in the trash bin. Stop hiding from your need to love and be loved. Learn to understand money the way your soul understands money. Most important (and hardest of all to accomplish if your Darwinian circuit is not balanced): be honest with yourself about your motives and your true intent. In other words, stop lying to yourself. Fear not the truth, for no matter how unloving you've been in your life up until now, your divine integrity is real and can't be threatened. God the Mother and God the Father wouldn't let you come here and **** up your brain if they didn't believe in you. But knowing this truth raises the bar for all human beings, and it's the bar that's causing all the problems. Everybody thinks they should get down on their hands and knees and crawl under the bar, when, in fact, they should put on their majestic angelic wings and hurdle the damn thing with all their might. Much love, Jesus November 21, 2006

Blessed Mother and Father God, You walk among us where we do not see And touch our hearts where we do not feel, And you rejoice at the way we have spread our wings. Please help us this day to remember your grace And our own, And to remember to hold your hand In the Kingdom Within. Amen. Love Jesus

Hey, don't look at me. I'm just the channeller, and this morning I woke up with a message from Jesus that he wanted to channel a parable. Some things just don't change, not even after 2,000 years. Mystical Seeker, you ask if nonviolence is the same as being nice. I spent a long time on this question. At first I thought the two must be synonymous. But then Jesus started asking me questions like, "What if a serial pedophile showed up at your door during a thunderstorm that had knocked out power and phone service, and you were home alone with your young child? Would you meekly let him in? Or would you slam the door in his face and do everything in your power to protect your child within the confines of the law?" (Naturally, it wouldn't be helpful to your child if you shot the pedophile in the head and then found yourself in prison on murder charges.) Being nice entails being empathetic, and compassionate, and forgiving, and responsible, and well organized, and courteous, and in command of your own thoughts, feelings, and actions. The extraordinary thing that Jesus discovered about being nice was that the nicer he got, the stronger his links to God became. The nicer he got, the more courageous he became. The nicer he got, the more aware he became of the political and social realities around him. The nicer he got, the tougher he became. He got nice, and because he got nice, the angels trusted him more and more. They gave him insights and answers his human mind probably wouldn't have thought of. You could almost say he got smarter, though really he simply became a better listener. (Naturally, it was God he was listening to.) I used to feel terribly guilty if an oppressive individual told me I wasn't being nice. Eventually, with a ton of help from Jesus, I realized there are two different groups on the planet -- the human beings who want to be nice, and the human beings who don't. The human beings who don't are the ones who make life awful for the rest of us. They're not acting like angels-in-human-form. They're acting like jerks. I no longer care if such individuals think I'm not being nice. It's their problem. They can do better as human beings -- a lot better. I believe in their true potential, I believe in the beauty and integrity of their souls. But by golly, I refuse to put up with their unangelic bullying tactics. That's how I see it, anyway. Love Jen