Forgiveness: What Is Sin? Post #5

The last two posts received a number of comments with ideas on what’s involved with the process of coming to forgive someone. People may want to read each others' comments for this.

Although there are exceptions, and some of you have reservations, there was more agreement than I anticipated around the idea that wrongdoing may be more a matter of “not knowing what we do” than fully conscious choice.

Illustration: A way in which not knowing what we do may be understood is illustrated by this exchange between Crystal and I:

First, I suggested that it might be possible for a person to have rational clarity about the consequences of his or her actions, yet remain profoundly ignorant - of inner meanings, of spiritual consequences.

Crystal responded by amplifying further on the passage from scripture: "Yes, I think I see what you mean. Maybe this is what Jesus meant when he said 'they know not what they do' ... they knew they were executing someone, maybe even felt it was murder. But they probably discounted any spiritual consequences of that act. "

Explanation: This might fit nicely with Michael’s thought: "Going back to… this issue about sin, whether or not it is the 'conscious choice' or 'not knowing what we do…' {It could be} that sin isn't one or the other or even a mix of the two, but entirely both at the same time."

So at the level of rational understanding, offenders may be said to know the consequences of their actions, and in that sense they choose them. But on a deeper level, their awareness and their feeling for the consequentiality of their actions, both to themselves and others, may be quite limited - or even, and I think here of sociopaths, entirely absent. If, for example, one entirely or mostly lacks the knowledge and experience of compassion, and then murders someone pleading for his or her life, it seems to me that the sense in which the action is chosen is limited.

And to me, this point of view does make it easier to forgive.

Sin and Institutional Religion: The Church, as far as I’ve experienced it, traditionally takes the view that sin is tantamount to turning away from God with full and deliberate consciousness. In fact, I was personally warned not long ago by a conservative Christian, in a manner that he imagined was subtle, that I am going to hell unless I “choose” to parrot his line, “I accept the Lord Jesus Christ as my personal Savior.” It was clear that he just wanted me to repeat the words - he wasn't interested at all in discussing their meaning. I’ve also known some Muslims to similarly hint that not “choosing” to acknowledge Mohammed as the Seal of the Prophets and the Koran as God’s final revelation will has dire consequences.

And yet, “Forgive them Lord, for they know not what they do,” seems to me to offer us an alternative understanding of sin as deep ignorance, and one which is consistent at least with Christian scripture – I am less familiar with the Koran, so someone may be able to help us here.

As for me, I don’t believe in parroting lines for anyone. Even if I repeated a line to make someone happy, which I wouldn’t, I wouldn’t really agree unless I knew exactly what was meant by each word of the statement. And it isn't because I'm the "free-thinker" that my conservative Christian accuser thinks I am.

It's because truthfulness is basic to my approach to God. I obey that inclination. Call it part of my religion. As far as I know, I don’t choose this. It’s who I am. So if I’m wrong here, then I am deeply ignorant indeed.

Forgiveness: They Know Not What They Do. Post #4

Kathy, posting to the Changes link, along with AsianSmiles in the comments section to the last post, brought up a couple of interesting points that happen to be closely related. I wondered if they might be useful in the struggle to become “free-gracers” – that is, people who are able to forgive any and all offenses, rather than judging individuals who have offended us on a case by case basis.

Kathy: Forgiveness" hmmm? Well, Jesus had the attitude that humans do not know what they do. We don't even know why we do the things we do...how can we understand why other people do the things they do (hurting people and themselves)?

AsianSmiles: When my dad died two years ago, I cried like a baby. There was no room for bad memories, his failures and his offenses. All I felt was the grief when I hugged his cold and lifeless body. There was no room for blame. All I felt was the loss of a father that will be buried in the ground and the loss of a chance to tell him that he did his best and “that’s all that matters to me.”

A Question: When people behave badly to us, do they choose to harm us with full appreciation and consciousness of what they are doing – its implications for themselves as well as us? Are people “basically sinful” in the sense that they choose wrongdoing with full and knowing consciousness?

Or might it be better to think of offenses given to us personally, and to conceive of sin generally, as a matter of people being flawed, ignorant, often deeply and seriously… And yet possibly this is the best they can do, at least at that point in their lives, and in relation to us.

So “sin,” rather than being construed as “conscious choice,” becomes, “not knowing what we do” – ignorance, or being unenlightened.

What do you think?

Forgiveness: Process & Strategy. Post #3

Irina speaks of being in need of a “strategy” to forgive. Doshar speaks of how her lack of forgiveness of a certain person is like a “dark cloud” for her. She hopes to forgive one day even though it appears so impossible to her right now.

Tish G makes an interesting remark:

“I always think of forgiveness as process... as something that is ongoing the more we live our own lives and mature. Forgiveness is different at different times.

"It would be wonderful to be a Free-Gracer and have it actually work. More often than not, I hear people say they forgive someone--yet are doing so thru grit teeth. They are compelled to forgive by others, and follow the axiom of ‘act as if,’ hoping that if they follow the commands of others they will eventually ‘get it.’"

I agree with both her points. I’ve also known people who say they forgive, yet somehow give the impression they don't, at least not completely. At the same time, I think some people do really get there – at least with their own particular “cases.” As to "free-gracers," I’m not sure I’ve ever met anything more than aspiring ones.

A Success Story & Some Elements in the Process

Renee’s comment (Poems and Writings), for those who missed it, strikes me as an authentic account of someone who has been through the sort of process Tish mentions and came out of it really forgiving, and in cases where people committed what anyone would recognize as major transgressions against her. The process for Renee seemed to involve moving from a position where she’d come to see this as something she wanted to do, to finally really experiencing forgiveness at the level of her immediate feelings.

Elements in the process: Michael points to the passage of time. Certainly processing these things takes much time for most of us, so this is good to bear in mind. Eventually we may find that we can forgive people that we can’t now.

Lynne and Keshi point to acceptance and non judgment of the offender, and Emilyjane as having a genuine desire to forgive, as some specific elements that might be involved in this process. I'd add that maybe Tishs' "as if" - acting as if we forgive, although we don't yet - might be a stage along the way toward the real thing for some people.

A Time-Problem: Can Offenses and Forgiveness Occur Simultaneously?

Personally, I find time to be a big problem. The fact that everyday I live with added pain and accelerated physical deterioration that has been caused by others makes it hard for me to process things, hard to get them behind me. Also, there’s one person in my life, or who used to be, who could be very helpful in my circumstances but who isn’t. Whatever little contact we have shows that this individual remains unwilling or somehow unable to help when almost any person in his position would find it unthinkable not to help. So for me, I think I would pretty much have to become a “free-gracer” - not sure that I can ever resolve my own matters case by case.

A Real Free-Gracer?

The factors are so numerous; our specific situations so different. I wonder if there can be a single strategy.

Thich Nhat Hanh is a Buddhist monk. Years ago I read his, The Miracle of Mindfulness, and was impressed with the simplicity and profundity of his writing. If there really are some “free-gracers” around, I think he may be one of them. I found the piece that follows on someone else’s blog - as indicated on the link below. I’ve italicized two lines that I think might possibly give a clue about “free gracing.”

Interrelationship

By Thich Nhat Hanh(1929 - )

You are me, and I am you.
Isn't it obvious that we "inter-are"?
You cultivate the flower in yourself,
so that I will be beautiful.
I transform the garbage in myself,
so that you will not have to suffer.
I support you; you support me.
I am in this world to offer you peace;
you are in this world to bring me joy.

Quoted from Dance of Love blog http://www.danceoflove.blogspot.com/

PS: The "Changes" link has further comments on forgiveness that people have recently added.

Forgiveness: “Case by Casers” and “Free Gracers.” Post #2

I think I see an overall pattern to most of your comments. I’m just going to present the pattern here, without necessarily saying whose comments belong in what category. Most of you will “know who you are...”

The “Case by Casers”: Many of you seem to want to take a case by case approach to forgiving others. Whether you can forgive depends on certain variables. Major variables include how large the offense is; whether the offenses have ceased or are ongoing; and whether the transgressor repents. In some cases you can forgive; in others you can’t.

I’ll add that I think these variables affect everyone’s thinking in certain situations. For example, I can think of an occasion in my life where the individual apologized in such a sincere, meaningful way, and never again gave me the least offense, that my feelings were changed in an instant. I’m not even so sure you can call it forgiveness. The person had so clearly changed that to have clung to my anger would have been like trying to stay mad at a ghost.

The Free Gracers: Others of you seek a “unified field theory” – the Albert Einsteins of the forgiveness world! I’d like a UFT myself, but so far I’m no Einstein. In other words, free gracers want a way to forgive any and all transgressors.

Why? I think essentially because of something a number of you have pointed out or suggested: keeping those embers of blame or condemnation alive usually causes harm only to ourselves. It keeps us agitated, subtracting from our peace of mind. Unless we can forgive sins freely, then we ourselves are, so to speak, left at the mercy of those worst cases in which an individual has harmed us severely, has not changed his or her attitude, and apparently or in fact couldn’t care less about it. We remain in a state of turmoil. They get on with their lives.

Some of you have proposed some “free grace methods”: for example, not judging, and recognizing that we ourselves are flawed too, and have sometimes committed transgressions. But I know something in me wants to say: “But what that person did to me is much worse and less justified than anything I ever did to anyone else!” I keep going back to “case by case...”

So I guess I’d be interested if any of the free gracers have found a free grace method that not only sounds reasonable, but has really worked for you in situations of major transgression, and allowed you to feel – what? Love of the transgressor? Some simple lack of condemnation that’s emotionally neutral? What does it feel like?

Religion and Forgiveness: Two people brought the Bible into the discussion. As I find is often the case, you can find a basis in the Bible for more than one point of view.

Someone in the “Changes” section (btw, I changed the topic there to “forgiveness”) cited that verse about forgiving those who offend us “seventy times seven,” by which Jesus meant: forgive endlessly. Seems to make him a “free gracer.” On the other hand, someone else remarked that God requires us to repent before forgiving us for our sins. So God the Father is a case by caser but the Son is a free gracer? Gee, maybe God himself is having trouble with this one. If that's true, how on earth are we supposed to figure it out?? (You don't have to take me seriously on this last point, I'm mainly just trying to get myself off the hook...)

Forgiveness: Beginning with Anger. Post #1

Back to business… another topic in religion and spirituality: forgiveness. I really have no idea where to begin. It isn’t something I gave much thought to over most of my life. The more I look at it, the bigger and more complicated it seems to become. I’ll start with the one thing that appears basic and obvious to me.

Anger: Whatever it is, forgiveness involves getting past anger. Not to forgive is to remain angry.

The anger we hang onto when we don’t forgive isn’t necessarily a red hot flame. It can be more like a pile of embers that we tend to now and then, and only in the back of our minds. Just a cold, faintly glowing anger that doesn’t die. In a word, bitterness. We may attend to it reflexively, not even noticing when we do so. We seem unable to help it. And of course, embers can turn into a raging fire under the right conditions.

The Limitations of your Moderator… I feel less equipped to guide discussion of this topic than any other that we’ve looked at or that’s likely to come up. I anticipate your comments will provide at least as much insight as anything I can offer. Briefly, here’s why.

Easy - Prior to losing my health, my life was easy. I didn’t have much of anything to forgive.

To elaborate a bit: I did have the same sorts of issues around forgiveness typical of many others who are fortunate enough to be leading comfortable lives in wealthy nations. A certain amount of “baggage” from my past. Certain relationships. Issues from time to time dealing with people at work. Under these conditions, I was eventually able to reach a point of thinking that I knew exactly what forgiveness was – or more precisely, why it isn’t even necessary.

We all have strengths and weaknesses. Patience has been one of my strengths. On top of this, in my late twenties I did some reading in Buddhism. To me, the great thing about Buddhism is that it doesn’t just say, “Be good.” It provides ideas and practices for how to go about becoming a better person. I practiced. I changed. More and more, I was able to come out from under the control of my past in areas that had been holding me back. I also found that in dealing with others, slights or insults to my emotions almost entirely stopped bothering me. Any sting was transient.

So the idea I formed of forgiveness was simple: “Love does not take offense” – from Corinthians I 13, I think. If you’re not offended to begin with, then forgiveness never needs to take place. I imagined I had nothing further to learn about the subject.

Rough – In reality, I was clueless about what it means to suffer a real offense, let alone an endless series of them. Then, at age 37, I began a process of learning that to develop a health problem in America that is very rare and difficult to diagnose or treat, is to find out that you don’t matter. Not to the health care system. Not to any number of specific identifiable persons and entities within that system.

When the consequence of this is increasingly severe and irreparable forms of damage to your body accompanied by mounting pain and functional limitations that you must live with for the rest of your life, day and night – well, these are not small offenses. If the details of what I have gone through and still go through today with our health care system were things that I, as a healthy person, learned were happening to a perfect stranger, I would be outraged.

Certain ways of coping with these matters eventually arrived for me that leave me at peace at what I would describe as my deepest level. Yet frankly I am sure that I haven’t “forgiven” the persons involved. It isn’t a word that I can honestly use. To me, it has overtones of warmth and reconciliation that I simply don’t feel, and that at least in some respects, will never exist. (The harm-doers here are doing nicely without my forgiveness. We’ve “lost touch.”) So at levels that are not as deep, but deep enough, the embers glow - although I know they won’t erupt in flames. “Been there, done that.” I will never fan the embers that way again.

Impossible?

Still, I have not discovered how to put the past completely behind me when past offenses – including recent ones -- not only live on, but continue multiplying inside my frail body. From my former HMO and from a number of doctors playing God, I have received gifts that go on giving.

My own experiences will not be the focus of these posts. I refer to them for this reason: as a group, people sitting at computers and posting comments on blogs are probably not especially likely to be suffering from terrible social injustices. Yet every day millions around the world, primarily in poor nations, suffer gross bodily harm or death through the deliberate actions or inactions of others; or they must witness those whom they love experience such things, as my family has had to do with me. It is a terribly destructive thing.

So I don’t want our discussion of forgiveness to turn entirely on the average experiences of people leading relatively privileged lives in wealthy nations. Not that these experiences don’t count or represent real injury. It’s all real. But I don’t want us glossing over what a truly rough world it is out there, and the difficulty – impossibility? – of forgiveness in some situations.

My Interview with The New Yorker

Yes - it’s happened for me. The big time, high fives, eyes wide. After being interviewed some months ago by Famous Blogger Magazine and Conservatives Weakly, my phone rang last weekend – a surprise from the New Yorker’s new Editor-In-Chief, Mr. Newt York. York didn’t ask about my views on religion and spirituality. He simply wanted to get to know the face behind the mask, the mug behind the blog, the glove behind the dash. The new New Yorker, York explained, is going for a slicker image, and his team sees me as the cutting edge, the face of change, the… well, whatever the third one was. Oh! Yeah! The phone exchange!

Our phone exchange went like this:

Newt York: Mr. Martin, just a quick call to see if you’d like to come to our studios for an interview.

PM: It’s – up – to – you…

NY: No, really sir. It’s your call.

PM: You called me. Wait a minute… studios? I thought magazines had
“offices.”

NY: This is the big-time, big top, big tent. Interested, punk?

PM: Hey!

NY: Sorry sir, I forgot myself.

PM: If I come, will you publish one of my poems?

NY: We’ll think about it.

PM: Okay.


On to the interview itself. I have printed the text in full:

NY: Paul M. Martin, how is it that you have the sheer guts to face the blogging world without a moniker?

PM: I just use my regular reading glasses at the computer.

NY: I’m talkin’ nickname, handle, slang.

PM: Dang. You mean why don’t I use “Walrus Nose,” or “Shake-a-Puddin'?”

NY: Exactly.

PM: Because when I get to Charlie Rose’s show, I don’t want him introducing me that way.

NY: Intriguing… And why is it that you consistently choose to - defy all labels?

PM: Well, it’s just that nowadays they make the print small, so I mostly pop my microwaveables right in and don't mess with them. It's not so much a political statement.

NY: Speaking of politics - is there any statement that you would like to make now, in our forum?

PM: I would like to see this administration and Congress focus more on blogging.

Another Sentimental Journey…

Today’s off-topic poem is followed by again briefly looking back at events that inspired it from today’s perspective. Commentators who haven’t done so already, please feel free to vote for either “forgiveness” or “gratitude” as the topic for when we get back from virtual vacation and return to religion/spirituality.


Hong

Einstein said that space is curved by objects;
I know that it is curved by you.
Your lines and contours bend is so
That I am left bewildered –
Surrounded by your gestures and your gaze,
Caught up in the matrix of your smile and gentle laugh.
If you are there,
Then am I enfolded by your presence.
Grasped, I cease to move
And see
Only
You –
Or seeing other things, must see them in your light.
For every thing you touch – a spoon, a table, chair –
And all things in the background of my vision
When beholding You
Become splendid and one seamless whole,
A single portrait of You –
Standing, walking, sitting, smiling –
You
Poring over a book of English words
All frowning concentration forgetful of the sweetness of your frown,
Or laughing
Mirthful as a child.

At the edge of your seat across the table
At any minute you will have to go –
As always.
For now, you stay a while before my sight
Self-conscious and a little teasing,
A little leading in the way you raise your arm to touch your hair
In the way you look across at me and smile
And the smile still lingers and continues when you look away
A life of its own
Radiant and happy
I know it as the smile that women wear
Who see that they are praised
And I would take up all your time with praise
So send me on my way.

Loving you,
I would tell you if I could the reasons why.
I might say it is because your eyes and face and hair,
With every gentle and expressive curve seem grounded in an inspiration,
The outward turning of an inner grace,
The striving of a soul well-made for form and color –
Or that I love you for a poise
Which is your life and not your practice,
The constant demeanor of a constant kindness
And not a straining artifice that sometimes slips and fails
As do these words.
To tell you why I love you
This page would have to be not pulp and ink
But perfect mirror
That when you looked here you would see reflected You
And there would be my reasons why
Complete and whole.

And now you leave
Not for a day, but for a lifetime.
I never touched you
I never told you –
A married woman who I never meant to love
A light, a flame
Burned into my mind
One image creased,
Crushed into my sight
I can’t forget you
Hong.



Copyright Paul Martin 1986 all rights reserved

Looking Back: To me the poem easily answers the question: Can there be too much romance? But this can happen if you teach English as a Second Language to an exotic woman in your late twenties at a small school where your classroom is a large utility closet.

Off-Topic Week 2: “Sentimental Journeys”

Please Note - After this week, or next, or after Labor Day at the very latest, this blog will resume its serious demeanor and on-topic status for at least quite a while. I’m leaning toward the next religion/spirituality topic as being either forgiveness or gratitude. I’ll be grateful if you want to cast your vote, but will forgive those who don’t.

I Admit It

Most people who really know me today, or look at me a few seconds, think of me as a mature, decrepit man whose inner life is probably dominated by the word, “Ouch.” (See the hmoappeals link for details if you must.) Such maturity has sometimes led me to make sophomoric jokes about romance on other people’s blogs. No one has directly accused me of being anti-romantic; still, I feel there have been insinuations. You know who you are.

But yes, I too was once young and in love. Today’s poem is followed by briefly looking back at events that inspired it from a perspective of unflinching realsim and, of course, greater maturity.


A Forest Place

The woods are lovely, dark and deep
A poet from my home state said
And sowed another thought to reap:
That woods are lovely, dark and deep
As women who men dream of in their sleep
And when they waken ever seek to find;
The kind with thoughtful, mild and pensive brows
A shady place of winsome, ever-beckoning ways
Like dappled forest paths that fade and wait
Recede among the farthest trees
Enchant with all that lies so deep…

With hair more fragrant
Subtle-sweet
Even than the sudden scent of pine;
And arms wind-soft
To clasp, encircle men as gently as the air, but visibly –
More beautiful bower of graceful curves than these brown trees.

…and eyes like starlight-gleams
That shine between the highest branches in the dark
And mark a wider sweep of things
An endless arc
From which a fathomless compassion springs.

A woman is a tender earth
A sheltered home, a dark embrace;
A woman is a holy ground
A woman is a forest place.



Copyright Paul Martin 1986 all rights reserved


Looking Back - The poem was written in relation to a small grove of pine trees. My relationship with each would remain strictly platonic.

Off-Topic Week: Naptime

This one may have implications for art appreciation and religion.

Naptime at the Babysitter’s

Every day after lunch was naptime. Mrs. Landry, Charlie’s mom, would send Charlie to his room and ask me to go lie down on the big sofa in the living room.

At my house there was no such thing as naptime.

I would lie on my back and look at the ceiling. It had white squares. After a while the furzy pattern in the bright green sofa made my back hot and itchy, so I would lie on my right side, staring at the TV screen. Sometimes I looked at the off button, imagining it could be on. It was against the rules to get up. Ten minutes later the dark green color would seem to gnaw at the back of my retinas.

So I would lie on my left side for a long time, my nose pushed into the back of the sofa, itching. The clock ticked. It was against the rules to get up. I imagined what it would be like if nap time were over.

Then I would roll over on my back again, my eyeballs wandering slowly to a long picture over the sofa. It was Jesus having snack. He had lots of friends. It looked like a good picture, but it also looked like the people weren’t having too much fun because they were grownups or maybe there was no more apple juice.



Copyright Paul Martin 2005 all rights reserved

Off-Topic Week: The Missing Link

This may be another lightweight post, but notice that it does solve any problems with the theory of evolution.

The Missing Link

I can remember all the way back to my babysitter’s, because I really wasn’t a baby. I was three or four. So was Charlie.

Every afternoon me and Charlie would cross the lawn to watch Paul Laliberte. I heard grown-ups say that was his name. We didn’t know anybody else could be named “Paul,” so we always went to the edge of the lawn to see him go by on the sidewalk across the street.

But mostly we liked to watch Paul Laliberte because we didn’t know what he was.

He was taller than my mother, but carried a schoolbag. He got off a school bus, but walked in a slow, tired way, kind of tilting from side to side, just like grownups do. He had bushy black eyebrows. We felt sorry for him.


Copyright Paul Martin 2005 all rights reserved

Off-Topic Week: Discovering My World

Vacation: Lightening Up

Although I’m continuing to post as usual (MWF), I’m taking sort of a virtual vacation this week, and possibly next. So I’ll be posting things that are lighter in style or content – a lot lighter! - in keeping with the spirit of virtual vacation.

I plan to monitor the site less often during this time. So if it comes to any sort of brouhaha or fisticuffs – two of the very greatest ridiculous-sounding English words, IMO, for all you multiple-language speakers out there – the referee may arrive late! But I don't think these topics will cause controversy, even though evolution will be covered, sort of, later in the week.

Please note that the “How Have You Changed” link on this page has now changed topics. So it is that even mere links experience processes of personal growth and transformation. (You can probably tell I’m packing my virtual bags even as we speak…)

I don’t know about two weeks, but if I go that long, for week number two I might post a few romantic poems I wrote in my twenties. Sentimental for sure.

But for now, this week looks at certain very early experiences. Spiritual? Kind of, in some ways... Maybe you had things along these lines happen to you before too, or possibly to your kids.


Discovering My World

One of the first things I remember is being in grass. The sky was in a little hole way over my head. I could hear voices. I turned around, and everywhere there was big grass, taller than me. There were little white moths clunking into it. Even littler green things with legs were bouncing around like ping pong balls. Some of the grass was yellow and had funny stuff on top. I wondered if I would ever get out of there, but I wasn’t worried because I liked it.

When I was a few years older, I discovered how to turn around and around under my blankets until I didn’t know which way was out. I would lie there, thinking it was fun that I didn’t know. But this one time, I tried every way, and still there was no gap in the blankets. I struggled like a seal under the Arctic ice, growing desperate, having no idea where the air hole was. I clawed my way out of the bed, pajamas twisted, hair backwards, landing hard on the floor.

For a whole week, I would never try it again.



Copyright Paul Martin 2005 all rights reserved

Out of the Wilderness into the Whirlwind

Well, I want to start giving our tired brains, or mine anyway, a break from so much talk about belief, knowledge, logic, and verification. Interesting subjects, but I plan to post things today through next week that are more lyrical, or maybe fun – I don’t know about next week yet.

Anyway, as far as the new, “How Have You Changed?” feature of this blog goes, I figured out how to use it, at least for now. Below I’ve posted one of your comments, and then beneath it, I posted something that complements it in some way.

So here’s Joe on love. Joe’s blog is called, A Voice in the Wilderness. His link is already here on my blogroll. Joe is concerned with human suffering and social justice issues around the world, and he combines his words with photos. Sometimes he offers a personal story. His blog has a tone that is warm and wise.

What follows is my edited version of Joe’s remarks, so click on the “How Have You Changed” link if you want to read his complete thought, and those of others who gave their stories of change in relation to love.

Joe: On Love

When I was younger, how I experienced love was to receive it more freely that I gave it. As I have grown older and experienced a few crises that took their toll on my ego, I have come to see love as something more altruistic.

Don't get me wrong, I believe it is important to feel loved, but not as important as it is to give it - freely and without reservation. I don’t hold back now when it comes to expressing my love for people, whether they are strangers or not.

I am in love with life and I owe my appreciation to death because it knocked on my door for ten years. Amazing how sobering our own mortality can be! I haven’t time to stay angry or upset anymore than is absolutely necessary – there are some who might argue that there is no time at all for it, and that I need to grow. I agree. This is where I am at, however, and I am happy – very happy. Crises come and go but love abides now in my heart.

Loved Ones

The wonder of sheer being enters into our experience of what it is to love. Our response is informed by momentarily seeing into the surprise that there should even be such a thing as ISNESS at all. We receive an illumination of the other as a focused expression of what a whole universe has conspired to bring into being and sustain briefly in time as it proceeds along its way.

The poignancy of love resides in our tacit recognition that it took the work of all creation to raise the luminous fragility of our loved one up from out of uncreation for a little while. When we see someone that we love, the eyes and words that greet our own are the talking, smiling universe momentarily and minutely in-gathering itself to convolute a wonderful crease or fold in matter, space, and time capable of communicating with us briefly.

A person to be with is a blessing on us from out of the Unknown, an incarnation of being’s mystery in the process of making its intention more manifest. We are moved by the tremendous effort and achievement. Each individual life is an expression and utterance of the stars, the sea, and the whole mighty sweep of things that went into all our making. A small Word, a brief exclamatory process with a beginning and an end, a birth and a passing away, that emanates from the One and blends back again into the roaring of the complete whole along its path of destination.



Copyright Paul Martin 2005 all rights reserved


Thanks, Joe, and to all who posted comments to “Changes.” I enjoyed reading all your unique stories and styles.

Faith: Knowledge or Belief?

Some of you state that you know God exists. And I keep saying things like, “But I thought it was called ‘religious belief’, not ‘religious knowledge...’” And, “I thought the idea of revelation was that it was given to the Old Testament prophets, Jesus’ disciples, and Mohammed - not to us as individuals…”

So here I’d like to bring up some things that relate to the issue of faith as knowledge vs. faith as belief. My intention isn’t to try and change anyone’s mind, but to explain why someone who does not know that God exists may have trouble being convinced that someone else knows.

Speaking of God… First, I’m going to assume that those of you who say that you know God exists mean, by the word, “God,” what people usually mean: a Being that exists in distinction from the world S/he created. (The Monday May 30 archived post also looks at some other meanings that people may attach to the word God.)

In other words, God in not to be identified with the world. God is the Other who created the world.

Logic: To the best of my knowledge, logical proof of God’s existence is impossible. As I recall, the “Scholastics” were logicians and theologians living in the Middle Ages who came up with a long list of what they thought were logical proofs. As people became more sophisticated with logic, every “proof” was disproved.

Doshar brings up the one specific proof I happen to remember – because, like Doshar, I thought it sounded quite convincing. It’s called the “teleological argument,” or the argument from order or design. It’s pretty simple, yet sounds powerful.

It goes, 1. There is a high degree of order in the world. Just look at the elaborate and sophisticated construction of our own bodies, or the laws of physics, or even something as relatively simple as a flower – how all its parts operate to allow it to gather nourishment from the soil and light until it takes on its beautiful and symmetrical shape. 2. Only the existence of a Higher Intelligence – God – can explain how the world is so orderly and well designed.

To summarize: since there is design or order in the world, there must be a Designer. The problem with this particular argument is that it’s only an analogy.

Let’s say you find a piece of jewelry on the ground. It has design and symmetry. You know it didn’t just appear there on the ground. If you find a piece of jewelry, you know that somebody with intelligence and skill created it. The piece of jewelry is evidence for the existence of a jeweler.

But let’s say you’re out walking and you look down and see a flower. You don’t say to yourself: “Where is the maker of this flower? There must be a flower-maker around here somewhere!”

The teleological argument makes the analogy that the whole world is like a piece of jewelry, or a watch, or a car – something man-made, something created by an intelligent mind. But analogies don't prove anything. Logically, it is just as possible that the whole world is not like a watch, but like a flower that grows and develops on its own.

When you think about it, if God’s existence could be proved logically, then certainly something so important would be taught at every university. All intelligent and educated people would not only believe in God’s existence, but could even prove it to others! The only atheists and agnostics would be people not intelligent enough to follow the reasoning.

“Did I Really See That?” (Verification)

I used this example before, so I’ll use it again and add some detail.

Person A has a vision of some kind – say, of her deceased grandmother. Her sister, Person B, also has such a vision. To hear them describe their experiences, they sound equally vivid and intense. Yet Person A says: “I know I was visited by our grandmother.” But Person B says: “I’d like to think so” – or maybe she even says that she believes this – “but I don’t really know for sure.”

Since we are all familiar with things that take place only in our own minds, such as dreams, hallucinations, or things we just imagine, Person B doesn’t say, “I know I really saw our grandmother,” because she has no way to verify this. "Verification" is some additional way of checking, just to be sure. Just to know that we know.

We use verification all the time. Sometimes, we verify by using our own senses. Let’s say you’re starting to wake up, and you think you see your husband or wife standing near the bed looking at you. But maybe you’re still dreaming. So you reach out with your hand to try and touch the person.

The other major way we verify is by turning to someone else and saying: Did you see that too? We’ve all done this when we see something unusual, or something that goes by so fast that we’re not sure whether we really saw it. Scientists practice verification all the time, where it’s known as replicating a study. In other words, one scientist does an experiment, and it seems to show something. But maybe he/she made a mistake. So before the result is accepted as true, other scientists do the same experiment to see if they get the same result. Then they accept it as true.

To say “I know God exists,” is to claim to know something about a reality outside our own minds. Many people would ask someone making such a claim: How do you know? How do you verify that what you experienced was really God?

Interpretation and Experience

When a person claims to have experienced God, it is often clear to others that they experienced something powerful and important. It may have started them on a new path in life. They may be better persons because of it. Nevertheless, it is not necessary for others to share their interpretation or understanding of what they experienced: namely, that it was knowledge of God’s existence. People can have similar experiences and yet have different understandings of those experiences. Two people can each have a powerful religious experience. One might say, “I know God exists.” The other might not.

What Really Matters? Post #2.

Last Wednesday I asked, “What makes a person truly religious, or spiritual, or close to God?” What is it about our human natures that you think matters most, and why? I suggested considering beliefs, experiences, and actions.

Common Threads:

There was general agreement that our actions, beliefs, and experiences all matter, but much variation over what matters most. Some see belief as fundamental. Renee is an example: belief is the “fundamental material to your whole being.” Others stress experience. Goddess is an example: spiritual experience is what is most real to her, motivating her actions.

Still others struck me as “centrists,” or somewhere in the middle: Irina and Doshar’s comments seem to speak almost equally from out of belief and experience. Doshar observes that experience and belief don’t exist in complete isolation because there’s feedback between the two. They influence each other. A quick example: we may be more likely to notice or attach importance to experiences that are consistent with our beliefs, and less likely to do this with experiences that are inconsistent with them.

Love appears to be the single kind of experience cited most often.

There was widespread agreement that what is behind our actions – our motivations, effort, and intentions – matters more than their results.

Meaning-Makers All

MJ mentions that this discussion relates to trying to lead a meaningful life, and how impossible it is to judge others. She comments: “…we all have different starting points in life.”

Approaching the issue of life’s meaning is often described in terms of a process of “seeking.” I’m wondering if it isn’t more accurately described as a process of creation.

Look at the diversity on this blog! We’re from around the world, and early in our lives, we were exposed to a wide variety of experiences and religious beliefs. Moreover, nobody is in the same place now that they started from.

To me, it seems that we have all been involved in a single kind of process that’s best described as creative. It has some passive or “listening” aspects, whether you want to call this listening to God, the “Self” (in Jungian terms), your conscience – however you understand this greater voice. But then there is the matter of actively responding to that voice: making some changes in our lives, modifying our outlook, our values, and so forth. Notice too, that even “listening” is an activity, and that there are those who don’t do this – who do not pay much attention to these matters.

Renee started the “filling the hole” metaphor, which people went on to use in different ways. The way I look at it, we can fill up the hole of meaninglessness with things that don’t work out well, or for long: despair, or various forms of escapism – for example, making our lives about sensory pleasure (“eat, drink, and be merry”), or the acquistion of personal power or wealth. Or we can fill up the hole with listening for, and acting upon, interests, purposes, and activities that connect us to the wider world and to realities greater than ourselves.

Loose Ends

How to Know That We Know? Mau speaks of being “completely sure” of God’s existence. But to me the words “faith” and “belief” imply some degree of uncertainty. If we knew for sure, why would we need belief or faith? There is also the distinction between experience and interpretation. A quick example: I have two relatives. Each had a powerful vision of my deceased grandmother. One relative has no doubt that my grandmother really visited her. The other relative says she “likes to think" this happened for her too, but can’t be certain, since it might have been a creation of her own mind based on her memory of my grandmother.

What personally strikes me as the most important thing about Mau’s experience is that it appears to have had a lasting and postive impact on his life. To me, this suggests that it was an authentic religious or spiritual experience.

Would Believers Go to Hell in an Atheist Universe? (Naturally, I speak here metaphorically…) Mbaines emphasizes the importance of love, and of basing our view of the world on knowledge that is verifiable. (Basically, scientific knowledge.) I think everyone would agree with him, at least in part, on both counts. The world view of nearly everyone living today is informed by science. We believe the earth rotates on its axis, not that the sun actually moves across the sky. We know what causes earthquakes.

For Mbaines – who I hope will correct me if I’m overstating his position – religious belief is always a bad thing. But I think most of us would say that we have at least observed, if not experienced for ourselves, that belief often plays a positive role in people’s lives, helping to motivate them to do good. Neither can we deny that great harm has also been done in the name of religion, going back at least as far as the crusades and inquisitions that took place in the Middle Ages.

Is Action Just an Act? I haven’t heard back from Renee on this, but would like to – or from anyone else with similar views. She sees our actions as in no way bringing us closer to God, or doing anything to diminish what she sees as our basically sinful nature. For her, all human works are essentially a ritual of supplication toward God, and otherwise make no real difference.

I pointed out that we know saints by their actions; that I can’t believe Mother Theresa was not in some sense closer to God than, say, a career-criminal; and that our work often feels much more important than ritual or gesture. I gave the example of Martin Luther King, who knowingly gave up his own life so that others could lead more promising lives. He could have picked an easier ritual! Is proselytization really the only sense in which human beings can participate in some small way in God’s work?

Please see the brief post under this one if interested in the NEW “Changes” feature.

NEW “Changes” Feature

Someone asked what I’m doing with this new feature, which you can click on at the right of this blog's home page.

I don’t know! I’ll see how it goes...

I just have the idea that I’d like a place where people can simply tell and read each others’ stories relating to spiritual development, with little or no comment from me.

The topics will change from time to time.

What I’ve noticed so far is how easy it is to relate to the comments. To read them is often to find myself saying to myself: I’ve experienced my own version of that…

As to anything else I might do with the comments to Changes, I don’t know. Maybe I’ll feature one occasionally as a post.

No cash prizes, however…