Editorials

Dynamic Understandings of Divinity

By Jeff Ginger
Last Updated 10/27/06

I've never quite etched out a specific explanation on my spiritual beliefs in text before. The primary reason is that I want them to change. I have enough trouble pigeon-holing others, I don't want them to employ the same misfortunate tactic on me, nor do I want to even strive to dabble in having a 'holy-book' like reference for what I think about that thing most often called 'God'. So let it be said - my beliefs and ideas will change. They could be different by the time I finish writing this - unlikely, but possible. I'm interested in spreading my ideas and listening to those of others. I'm open to change.

Which leads me to an opening point. I think in order to be truly open minded you need to be comfortable with doubt. Being confident with not knowing everything or knowing things for sure is a key element to my life outlook. I simply use the best ideas and understandings I have at the time - based on a number of influences - the past, logic, feelings, etc... This concept of blind or absolute faith is something I understand to be arrogant, ignorant, and just plain dangerous.

I'm a big advocate of thinking we choose what we put our faith in. Yes, that means I believe in free will and free choice. No I don't think some savior brought it to us, but I don't buy that whole determinism thing. Logic isn't always the only possibility, nor is it even always, well, logical. Anti-determinism is a debate for another day. For those of you that're wondering, that means I reject the concept of fate as well.

Also worth noting is that I think there's a big difference between religion and spirituality. Religion to me says organization and institution. It also often means control and less free will and self-inspired thinking. Thus I don't want to say that I belong to an umbrella religion.

So with this foundation of disclaimers and operational procedures, I'd like to take it back to the simple beginnings.

I believe in love. Yes, as simple and as complex as that. The closest thing I know to that which we refer to as God is love. If you ask me why I think love is a form of God, the best response I can give is that I feel it. Beyond this it makes sense to me, but bottom line I don't have a 0100111 logical computer response that might be read as a catch-all definition.

Love has many meanings and forms - films like love-actually portray this. I very much enjoy the idea of love being infinitely complex and nearly impossible to define, yet be something we can feel. It's different for every person, just like I think spirituality should be.

If love can potentially be found in all people then God could be manifested in any individual. That's to say I think you can find a little bit of God in all of us. To the best of my understanding 'us' is limited to sentient thinking, understanding conscious beings with an identity. At this point I don't think it could apply to a one-celled organism or inanimate object. But I don't know where to draw the line for sentience (perhaps there is no line), and I don't know this for sure - reference the fundamental and essential doubt that makes me human and capable of forgiveness, change, and a number of other invaluable characteristics.

This base foundation of love serves as a place from which all of my other understandings of God come about. It's the intangible stuff that we have words to describe, but aren't quite 001100 quality either. To name a few in no particular order - forgiveness, humility, passion, loyalty, charity, honesty, compassion, understanding, infinity, etc...

If you look across most of the religions and faiths throughout time and the world you continually encounter these same themes and ideas. This is why at root, I think all of the religions are fumbling towards discovering a truth that includes all of these, but have not reached it yet. I haven't either, and likely never will.

I don't have all of the answers. I'd be scared to death if I did.

God is a tricky concept. I say concept - not person. I don't think anyone can fully or truly understand God. All of these people who say "God says this" and "God says that" really truly disturb and worry me. I think the personification we apply to God is just a tool to help us try to understand the incomprehensible. Conversations with God or connection through prayer isn't something I can accept like conversations on the phone or connection to the internet. No I don't believe you when you say you talked to God. I don't think God is an entity that's simple enough to merely talk to. It's more comparable to a force - an existence - a universal law that we see manifested through people and feelings. I can understand someone feeling God, but not going out to coffee with God. If I ever apply 'him' or 'her' to God I'd like to mention that I still don't think he's a person or would have anything to do with gender or biological sex.

So few people seem to understand my perspective, however. You don't need a savior or a defined prophet or ritualistic confounded philosophy to be a good person. I believe you just need to love. I'm comfortable not belonging to a giant religion or claiming to have the best answer. It's okay to say "I don't know, but here's what I think based on what I feel and do know."

As for the creation of the universe - I don't think God made it - if anything God is it. God was no more always here than he is continually destroyed and created himself. There's no need to squabble about how the universe came to be - I'm content squabbling about finding ways to better love each other.

So some of you are thinking this vague and not very controversial. I can try some more potent words then, perhaps.

My favorite dangerous question to ask Christians, is "Why Jesus?" Why not some other savior, or better yet, no holy savior at all?

See that's the one I was never able to answer, and don't think there's a good answer to. I don't buy most of them that I've heard - and the ones I accept aren't right for me.

I don't believe in Jesus or accept him as my personal (or non-personal) savior.

Jesus may have existed as a person in history (though I've heard good pitches that he was just a myth) - most importantly though, I don't think he was or is God. Sure he could have God manifested through him - but so have so many people in history. I simply don't believe in saviors or holy prophets.

Most Christians say we need Jesus and a relationship with Jesus - to be good people, to go to heaven, to know the truth, etc... But they say this because a holy book and being raised in a Christian tradition tells them to.

Which is segway for my next point - I don't take any given holy book as law. Just as love and good ideas and concepts could be encountered in many people, you can find them in many books. The bible and quaran and torah and whatever other holy book you pick all have good ideas in them. They're not law. They're interpretations that are confused, bias, historically based in the context of their beginnings, and are just plain hard to translate. Don't give me this bull-shit 'the bible says so' - yeah well I can write a book, say God wrote it through me and then I'm just as legitimate. Oh so I'm not a million years old. Fine - do you believe the Greek myths? They've got Christianity on age and yet everyone thinks they're fiction. Guess what - the bible is fiction based on a little bit of actual history too.

Or so I think and believe. Enter crucial doubt.

So without need for a savior or a holy book - what do we have? Love that's greater than Jesus, bigger and more important than the bible. Or Torah or Muhammad or golden cow.

I figure I can make some mention about some other elements of religion -

I pray in the form of meditation (no not trance-like non-thinking existence, but sitting, relaxing, and working to clear my mind) and in self analysis and introspection. I don't generally feel a connection with some curly haired arab carpenter's son from a bazillion years ago, however. Instead I sometimes feel a connection with love.

I'm agnostic in regard to the afterlife - I don't care if it exists or not, I'm here in my life now to make the best and most positive impact I can on myself and others.

I almost always try to value sentient life - both in the sense of biological life and truly living. I think it's okay if sometimes life must be ended to save more life.

Some people may be surprised to learn I'm part of a youth group, and have been involved in youth groups for some time. I can find few places and groups of people with such love. The communities of youth I've been involved in have always been open and accepting, and embody the qualities I think are most important.

I do enjoy worship - or the act of singing with groups. It's not the words - be they Jesus or how bobo banged sally that matter to me - it's the emotions and feelings that come about in the environment.

I don't like evangelism without doubt. If you're out convincing people to believe like you do without acknowledging publicly and openly and honestly to them that you could be, have been, and will be wrong, then I disagree with your method. I love idea exchange, I don't like power and authority relationships and one person telling another how to believe because of fear of hell or being left alone or not being one of the in-crowd.

I do think there's a right and wrong out there. It changes with time, with circumstance, and by person, but I think we define our rights and wrongs - every day - every moment. We all judge, like it or not - be it the distance from you to the computer screen or why you find the lad next door such a good baker of apple pies. It's how we act on these judgments that matters. So yeah, I judge you, your acts, who you are as a person. But what I do about that is the key thing.

I'm not much for the concept of simply flowing with nature or letting things be as they are. I'm all about being active and assertive in both my life and the lives of others. I think it's a crime against people to not care and not stand up for others and get out there and love them, in whatever way you find best.

And that's just it. Full circle - my spirituality is to love. To make every day one worth remembering, yearning to make every moment one that you can value, cherishing connections with others, learning to grow and understand the world around you. To get out and create and to help others and bask in all of the feelings that accompany. If my life were to end two minutes from now I'd want to be able to sit back and know that I was living it the best I could have - filling it to the brim with the robustness of love and life. To that end, I spread my ideas. May some of you see some inspiration amongst these technicalities of my sp ritual framework and just sit back and... smile.

Go compliment somebody who deserves it. I was missing gratitude on the big list.

My Faith

Tom Fairbank

Hey Jeff, I liked your post. You had some good things to say. Here's my response to some points of your editorial.

1. "I'm talking to God"

I believe God is in all. When someone says they are talking to God they mean two things. First that they are aware of God's existence. Second that they are communicating with the Divine. To communicate with the Divine is simply focusing on the spiritual world instead of the physical. It is also to let God speak to you. Now I can tell that you do not believe that God can speak. But God can. I've heard it. And I'd ask any who wish to hear to take time in silence and listen to God. It's a subtle, yet powerful and incredibly loving. In silent prayer one lets God speak, and that is when we can hear God and be in tune with the rhythms of the spiritual world.

2. "Why Jesus?"

Jesus was one who was completely aware of God's existence and his intimacy with mankind. Jesus knew that all mankind was Divine and sought to spread this good news to all who would listen. Many have come to Earth with this message, but Jesus is the one I find most inspiring.

You talk about a collective need for a love that is greater than Jesus and this confuses me. I see Jesus as the embodiment of love. As the Son of God who was intimate with the divine and sought to bring all into a relationship with God and with each other. What love is greater than the love Jesus had? Where did Jesus fall short of the glory of God?

3. Evangelism

I have enjoyed my relationship with God. I have known others who have also enjoyed their relationship with God. I believe people would like God, if they got to know him, and knew how much God loved them. I see evangelism as seeking to bring all into a relationship with God. And if God is Love then I desire the world to know the love which surrounds us, created us and watches over us. I see no harm in spreading love and the ministry of Jesus Christ. I know others in the past have misunderstood Jesus and the prophets. But let us not have language as a barrier. With how I practice and understand evangelism what is wrong with it? If nothing is wrong with it then please refrain from condemning evangelism.

4. Overall

I understand we have different faiths. And I thank you for the courage and wisdom you had to write what you did. However, I would appreciate your respect of my faith and religious tradition. I hope that my love of Jesus and the Bible does not anger you. Thank you again for your honesty and openness in dealing with these issues.

Quickly

By Jeff Ginger

I'll flush this response out later, but I couldn't post the above without at least saying something.

This listening to God thing sounds like listening to fairies or leprechauns. If you listen hard enough to the made up things in your mind you'll certainly hear them!

Your belief in Jesus as the embodiment of love is based on what a book and preachers say about him - I don't believe he was this ultimate embodiment of love that Christians do. I think he was a man just like any other, and was not the son of God - because I don't think you can be the son of a power beyond human understanding. I think our interpretations and understandings of god are fumbles in the dark - our best representations of something that's not human or completely accessible by humans. I can't see God taking anything less than a universal form. I don't think Jesus was completely aware of God's existence any more than other people very in touch with love. Even still I don't think you could have complete awareness and understanding of something as incomprehensible as God. The reason God is a greater encompassment and entity, to me, is because Jesus is not God any more than anyone else is - God may have manifested a form of itself through Jesus, but I don't think he was the pure single only manifestation of God. Therefore love grows beyond. When he's just a man, or a fabricated deity (like the Greek Gods) then he isn't so important. But that's just my perspective, and I know I offend and assault the very core of being in many others by saying this. My definition and understanding of God doesn't allow for any one human to be the one or best representative of something more epic than we can fathom. To me putting stock in one man with a whole lot of unsubstantiated rumors around him is just plain foolish and unrealistic. God is encountered in so many forms, Jesus may have been a small example - just one that had the fortune of finding an entire religion sprung up behind him. I also think it's unfair and limiting - to close your mind to the possibility of other amazing representations of god is exclusive and a less than universal method of approach.

Here - the break down:

Jesus was one who was completely aware of God's existence and his intimacy with mankind.

On what basis can you say this? Our knowledge of Jesus is grounded in readings from the bible (which are subject to hue amounts of interpretation and translation). What's more is that Jesus didn't write the Bible himself - what he thought and what he was aware of cannot be truly known - all we know is what people chose to write/engineer about him.

Jesus knew that all mankind was Divine and sought to spread this good news to all who would listen.

What does it mean to be divine? And he didn't really spread the news to many people - according to my Religious Studies professor Jesus most likely only preached to small out-lying villages and communities. Jesus couldn't have possibly known all of mankind, and once again there's no reasonable way to know with certainty what he sought to spread.

Many have come to Earth with this message, but Jesus is the one I find most inspiring.

Could this be because you've grown up in America, a Christian country (which is on a conservative back swing now too) and nearly all of your life you've been socialized into Christianity? I know that you're one of the most explorative and idea challenging people I know Tom, but there is still much that you (or I) do not see. Had you grown up in the inner city poor, and discriminated against, or in the middle of Africa in an AIDS stricken environment you likely wouldn't think anywhere near the same. By the same right given different circumstances I might find different inspirations and understandings - but one way or another I think I'd find my way to those underlined and essential ideals I outlined above.

Jesus, by my understanding, was at most a man. He was likely a pretty influential and great figure, but has been blown out of proportion and redesigned to fit the needs of many over the years - so diluted has his image become, I think, that it's lost touch with true universal love and instead found a route into segmented and exclusive circles of thought.

If we ground our minds in Jesus (especially that 'only to heaven through me' bullshit) then we are excluding other people - I believe in a system that includes all people.

I addressed a lot of this statement above too... my apologies for repeating myself.

"I have enjoyed my relationship with Mr. Leprechaun. I have known others who've enjoyed their relationships with him too. If they believed in him they'd know that lopping off heads and eating the brains out of others is the best way to go. Therefore I spread my belief of taking heads and brain soup." (yes that was a mean mockery)

Which is worse, to be spiritually killed or physically?

We, as people, inevitably disagree in what we believe. I said it before - I have a problem with someone trying to convince others to believe religiously or spiritually as they do if they don't admit doubt in what they think. I also feel evangelists make a negative judgment - they say that you're not living the right way and are therefore not the person you should be. I make negative judgments too - I'd say the same thing about a spree serial killer. But I make my judgments without knowing for sure if I'm right. I don't pretend to be the all knowing authority who will by his good graces show you the best way of life. I don't get out there and establish negative judgments, authority relationships, and try my best to avoid the arrogant messiah complex.

Tom your evangelism generally lacks the negative judgment, and thus doesn't follow suit with the typical stuff I encounter. It does, however, come without admission of doubt, which still worries me. If you have no doubt and absolute certainty about something - if your method is perfect - then what sets your apart from God? Are you not assuming the role of God by having absolute judgments?

Tom your love of Jesus and the Bible don't anger me - not any more than I might get frustrated with disagreeing about how we like our pizza cooked. Your interpretations and spread of what you see to be the word are for the most part, great. I have larger problems with some of the other ills of Christianity (or the interpretations of it)- admittedly they would be in other religions or faiths if I lived in a different country or people with a separate set of cultural beliefs.

All of this angry exchange is a little disturbing to me. I know that behind a lot of my text is probably frustration with people whom I've known as Christian that have committed acts of hatred and act in ways that I believe to be contrary to my belief - which is love. I myself haven't been particularly silk-gloved or loving in my appeal here - but I do sometimes believe in strong challenges and change, as I know you do too.

We have a great deal of common ground - without a doubt we're both after this love mission, and you definitely have some very progressive and innovative ideas surrounding it. At the end of the day I still do feel Jesus is constraining and an American socialized ideal. Just like I want to learn how to live more globally in terms of human rights I want to learn to live more globally in my religion too.

I'd also like to say that you're probably one of the most inspiring Christians I know. The faith has become so diverse - you definitely are one of the few that I see challenging, truly thinking for yourself, and most of all, not being afraid to love others, no matter the cost. To that end - keep it up - we might have some detail differences, but at the end of the day I think we're both trying to accomplish the same mission.

Prophecy Does Not Prove Jesus or the Bible

By Jeff Ginger

In order to prove--and I mean *prove,* not just surmise--prophecy fulfillment, one would have to establish four things:
(1) the claimant of a prophecy fulfillment is properly interpreting whatever text he is basing his claim on,
(2) the prophecy was made *before* and not after the event that allegedly fulfills the prophecy,
(3) the prophecy was made not just *before* an event but far enough in advance of it to make educated guesswork impossible, and
(4) the event that allegedly fulfilled the prophecy did in fact happen

Inherent to this idea of prophecy is that there are more predictions that have not been fulfilled. At this point these predictions are false. At the point up until they were fulfilled they were false.

Therefore the Bible is currently wrong until certain prophecies are fulfilled.

-2 stories of genesis
-books selected and bible constructed
-formulated storylines and prophecy, injected with context and personal outlooks
-differences between the telling of stories between sections
-anything long enough will make correct predictions
-most prophecies outside of the book are coincidental or vague

-most of all, just because a book predicts the future doesn't mean it was written by god
-I believe god to be atemporal, not bound by the silly inventions of man
-I can't see god constrained to a book or correctly interpreted by a book - instead we make fumbling interpretations of him/her/it/whatever

Facebook Message

By Elaine Ginger

I was bored right now and was reading your editorials. i read your one about god and Jesus etc. and wanted to bring this to your attention. does jesus have to be real in order for his message to be good? i couldn't care lass whether he is real or not, the son of god or not; however, i respect the teachings he taught. I don't believe for a second that he is my savior or that he was the son of god and i don't think anyone can say whether he actually existed (and if he is real, there's no way he did everything the bible says he did). However, he taught, or his stories teach, to accept differences and love everyone. If even half the christians in the world actually followed jesus, the world would be twice as peaceful. I am more of a Christian than most and i don't even believe in god, I'm sick of people saying they are followers of jesus but then they go and discriminate against gays and advocate the death penalty...its all very hypocritical. Anyways, from your editorial i didn't get the impression that you ever thought about this and I just wanted to bring it up, and go on a rant apparently. Hope school is good, see you on thanksgiving!

The Spirit of Jesus

By Jeff Ginger

So in light of reading Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life I want to revamp this entire piece - not enough time for now, but some interesting points:

Best epistemology? Truth out of falsification? Vacuous truth? Apriorism (transcended reality, timeless... i.e. absolute morality) or empiricism (understanding and knowledge through experiences and observation, infinitively unique and dynamic)?
Religion (Christianity) as an organization or institution - power derived from the collective, not the individual
Jesus as a sacred symbol (contrasted to profane or mundane man) - form of articulation for ideas and belief
Religion as fundamentally tied to power dynamics (not an impersonal force of causation, instead developed or evolved power structures)
Collective Effervescence! Snowball effects, power of institution (yes Tom, critique directed at you - it's your Christianity ridden with institution)
Consumerism as the new religion? Are people moral unto themselves? Role of individual agency? Backlash of extremist religion?

So without the proper introduction Elaine, I'll give you a quick summary. Basically I see Jesus as a sacred symbol - a construct resultant of social reality - the same devices that concoct Christianity. So the question of the man, his divinity, his mission, is arbitrary (or moot) in my mind - he's an articulation of the faith.

The idea of Jesus is considerably cooler. Check it - so the Spirit of Jesus is a wonderful lifestyle (and concept). What did [the idea of] Jesus live and stand for? Love! Forgiveness! Humility! A multitude of other admirable qualities we could all do well to interlace into our lives. If Christianity is truly just a development of the global social collective and is in no way attached to a supernatural god, this still works too. To live like Jesus did is beneficial for everyone, it's a positive survival trait and just downright meaningful.

So in answer to your question, yes, I've given a great deal of thought to the Spirit of Jesus, and would say I believe strongly in it - those underlined concepts I outlined above - those are what the idea of Jesus is all about, right?

By this same right, some people will categorize me then as Christian, solely because I believe in the way (idea, spirit) of Jesus.

The reason I make so much effort to delineate is because of the connotation or associations people typically have with Jesus. They do see his actual existence as an important event. By placing too much emphasis on one dood who had a lot of good ideas we lose sight of the benefits of the abstract - Jesus, in short, is constraining, and so I refrain from talking about him in regards to my own views unless I'm trying to help a Christian relate.

So yeah, I agree, the idea of Jesus rocks, and many people could stand to learn from this ideology!

Thanks for giving feedback!