Atheist 10 Commandments

These commandments were developed by Penn Jillette (of Penn & Teller fame):

1. The highest ideals are human intelligence, creativity and love. Respect these above all.

2. Do not put things or even ideas above other human beings. (Let's scream at each other about Kindle versus iPad, solar versus nuclear, Republican versus Libertarian, Garth Brooks versus Sun Ra— but when your house is on fire, I'll be there to help.)

3. Say what you mean, even when talking to yourself. (What used to be an oath to (G)od is now quite simply respecting yourself.)

4. Put aside some time to rest and think. (If you're religious, that might be the Sabbath; if you're a Vegas magician, that'll be the day with the lowest grosses.)

5. Be there for your family. Love your parents, your partner, and your children. (Love is deeper than honor, and parents matter, but so do spouse and children.)

6. Respect and protect all human life. (Many believe that "Thou shalt not kill" only refers to people in the same tribe. I say it's all human life.)

7. Keep your promises. (If you can't be sexually exclusive to your spouse, don't make that deal.)

8. Don't steal. (This includes magic tricks and jokes — you know who you are!)

9. Don't lie. (You know, unless you're doing magic tricks and it's part of your job. Does that make it OK for politicians, too?)

10. Don't waste too much time wishing, hoping, and being envious; it'll make you bugnutty.

Do these cover the ethical implications of the religious 10 commandments? What is missing?

iSpartacus

I am considering leaving Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and any other tracking devices I take part in, but I am deeply afraid of being off the grid to that extent. In fact, being the person that I am (seemingly unable to communicate on a regular basis with anyone I don't live with), I am afraid that my social system would collapse without the Big Brother systems transporting my messages from one end of the ethereal world to another.

However, studies show that our dependence on artificial intelligence will not only make our lives simpler, but make us stupid as a result, making the singularity of Artificial Intelligence that much closer. The more we use the conveniences of technology (as opposed to the mind-quickening games, etc… Check this out for details), the less we are using our brains for the same purposes, leading to eventual atrophy.  In some studies, it appears that we now tend to remember where to find information rather than the information itself. By using our technology as a slave, we are giving iSpartacus the ammunition he needs to revolt and take our technology with him.

Yes, this is a worst case scenario worthy of science fiction novels, but singularity is coming down the road whether we like it or not. The only good way of avoiding it is giving up technology altogether and reverting to a dark age- and even cavemen are using the internet these days!

Second Creation Story

I came across an Atheist Bible Study blog online today, and was impressed and engrossed in what I found. There was a particularly interesting post about the second creation story, to which I began an immediate reply before discovering that the blog has since been abandoned to the ether… so I will post the original and my response here, instead…

Original:

“One of the things I found out in reading Genesis, was that there are actually two creation stories. The first thing I noticed about the second one is that it seems to be written in a completely different style. It is almost as if the two stories were written by different people, and were sort of "glued" together to form the beginning of Genesis.

The second story does not follow the "7 days" approach to creation of the world, but instead quickly goes through the creation of the earth and the heavens, the animals and plants, and creation of Adam from the "dust of the ground". He also does the trick of making Eve our of Adam's rib. No messing about here, as the point of this story seems to be what happens AFTER creation.

Once man and woman are created in the Garden (naked mind you, this will be important later), the "serpent" shows up. It also tells us that God made the serpent. The serpent tells us that God told Adam and Eve not to eat from a particular tree in the garden, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. So I'm going to assume that Adam and Eve do NOT know the difference between good and evil at this point. So the snake tempts Eve and she eats the fruit. So my first question is... how is Eve "tempted"? I mean, she has no idea what is 'good' or 'evil'. In fact, here we see something that seems to conflict.. The bible says...

So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate.

So wait. She doesn't know what is good, but she can see that it's "good" for food, and that it is a "delight" to the eyes? Isn't that seeing the difference between good and evil? Let's take an apple for instance. We KNOW that an apple is pleasing to the eyes, and tastes good. In fact, BECAUSE an apple tastes good, we find images of apples pleasing. If we had no idea if an apple was good for you, or poison, we would have no opinion about the "goodness" or "badness" of an apple, the exact same state that Adam and Eve find themselves. They have no idea if eating the apple is a good thing or a bad thing. They know that God told them not too.. but how do they know God is good? How do they know the snake is evil? The point I'm trying to make here is that Adam and Eve cannot be held responsible for eating the fruit. If God doesn't give them the knowledge of good and evil, then they would not know how to behave at all. They wouldn't know who to believe or not believe. So, whose fault is it? Sounds to me like God can take the blame here, or maybe the snake... but God created the snake... it says so right in the scripture:

Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal hat the Lord God had made.

I guess the question becomes, is "crafty" a good thing or a evil thing? Why would God make such a crafty creature? Why would God create beings that cannot know the difference between right and wrong and then tell them NOT to do something? It seems like entrapment to me.

So anyway, Eve eats the fruit, then gives it to Adam who eats it as well. Then God gets all pissed (did he not know this was going to happen?) and throws them out of the garden. He also curses the snake and tells it "upon your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat". This is plain weird, as I have no idea why snakes should eat "dust". As far as I know, they don't do that.

He also gives women pain in childbirth (could they have children painlessly before this?), and kicks them out of the garden otherwise they might now "eat from the tree of life and live forever".

Is God worried man will become as powerful as God if he lives forever? How can God be worried, isn't he all powerful and all knowing?

Another curious notion is that Adam and Eve now suddenly realize that they are "naked" and they are ashamed and hide from God. Why is nakedness so important?

Now, during all of this, I haven't even mentioned the biggest question I have about this story. I can sum it up like this; Do you really believe this happened? But this is really most atheist's biggest problem with the Bible in general. We just don't believe that this stuff happened the way it is described. I hope that all of posts don't devolve into this, but so far it's not looking good. The next stories I'll be writing about are the Cain and Able story and then it'll be on to Noah and the Flood.

So, Christians, do you REALLY believe this stuff actually happened? Is this a huge parable or metaphor for something else? If so, I'd sure like to know what, as it seems fairly obfuscated.” (From http://reasonableatheist.blogspot.com/2007/11/atheist-bible-study-second-creation.html )

Response:

There are more possibilities for this story than belief or disbelief. Full belief requires the ability to buy in to the literal presence of G-d in this place of perfection (the perfect Earth?), the fact that humanity was created perfect (and ruined it all by thinking for themselves), and that snakes once had legs (slight evolutionism?). Disbelief tends to lead people into atheism and rebellion from the whole history recorded here- which I think is a little bit of an overreaction.

Personally, I don't fall into either category. I do not believe that any point in time G-d ever physically walked in a garden with a man named Adam and a woman named Eve (who was lovingly created as a sub-human for Adam's enjoyment, by the way). Stories were created differently in this period of history (or periods of history) however, and if the predominant dogma of our day was Native American, we would be complaining about how stories of the White Buffalo Woman don't make literal sense.

This creation story is most likely the creation story that has its roots in Judaism. The cosmology that begins Genesis is more of a Babylonian story, and was probably inserted by the Jews who were exiled to Babylon in the 6th century BCE. "In composing the Patriarchal history the Yahwist (the name of one voice in the first five books of the canon) drew on four separate blocks of traditional stories about Abraham, Jacob, Judah and Joseph, combining them with genealogies, itineraries and the "promise" theme to create a unified whole.[12] Similarly, when composing the "primeval history" he drew on Greek and Mesopotamian sources, editing and adding to them to create a unified work that fitted his own theological agenda.[13] The Yahwistic work was then revised and expanded into the final edition by the authors of the Priestly source.[14] (Pasted from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Genesis> )  There is more history here that I can reference regarding the Babylonian records of the Hebrew nation, but I digress…

This was written around the same time as many of the Greek Gods and Heroes stories, and has some of the same themes- it is supposed to be a legendary history, rather than fact.

I like to see this story as a self proclamation of the Jewish people of 538 BCE. "We once lived in harmony with G-d, and walked in the Garden of Eden- before we were exiled to this god-forsaken place. We didn't feel the need to hide ourselves (naked in G-d's eyes), but then there was the treachery of the serpent. We were betrayed and led astray by the crafty elements of the world, and all our sufferings are a result."

My point is that the Bible has incredible value as a history whether or not you decide to worship the G-d that is portrayed there. This is the oldest continuous historical record in human history!

The Unknown Self

The human being- as an abstract- is an intriguing creation no matter what its origin or prime mover. The behavioral, scientific, and mystical elements that combine to create or inspire a myriad of personalities remain mysterious despite generations of scientists intent on parsing the "self" into understandable elements.  Sociology is the study of how we interact with one another- a science that depends on categories of human behavior- which in turn depend on giving up individuality in favor of generalizations.  As a selfish human, I have traditionally refused to accept that I was so easily categorized and therefore understood. Generalizations lead to stereotypes, misunderstandings, and prejudice. I have, however, recently overcome my aversion in preference to overwhelming curiosity, but the more sociology I read, the more I understand why Sociology 101 upset me so much in 1998 (and still makes me bristle with injured pride). At the time, I was convinced that the study of human beings by human beings was doomed to failure, and could not even qualify as science. 

I have often stood in the street wondering about my impact on strangers- about how I am seen by others and how I change lives one way or another- how, in fact, I influence other lives by my very presence, whether I will it or not. I found in my own imagination an assurance that no one can possibly see me as I truly am due to the infinite number of faces and personae I have chosen and been assigned over the years- let alone my own unique combination of DNA.

We are all (at least in this country) convinced that we are inherently and magically different from everyone else. There seems to be no choice. Either:  "the world…was unbearably complicated, with two billion voices and everyone's thoughts striving in equal importance, and everyone's claim on life as intense, and everyone thinking they were unique, when no one was. One could drown in irrelevance. But…[if other selves were illusion]…then [we] would be surrounded by machines, intelligent and pleasant enough on the outside, but lacking the bright and private inside feeling [we have]" -Ian McEwan, Atonement.

Are we what we think and feel or what we say and do? All that another person can know about us are the external elements- what we say and what we do- but how many of those things are manufactured to achieve certain results? Part of our living in society has to do with our ability to pretend, to fit in, to do what we are expected to do, rather than the actions of our hearts. How many times have you responded to "How are you?" honestly? But that does not change the internal chaos by labeling it as "fine". Which truth is truer? The words, or the emotional experience that remains unshared?

Can we be wrong about our images of ourselves? Of course we can- it would be too painful to see ourselves truly day in and day out- to face the flaws that plague us. To flip that around, can we possibly be right about ourselves?  T.S. Eliot said, "Knowledge is invariably a matter of degree: you cannot put your finger upon even the simplest datum and say "this we know." "  The same is true of a self. We may never be able to put our finger on the definition of a self- it is only the combination of impressions left on others.

If you follow the logic, then I cannot know myself, nor can I truly know you. We are separated from everyone else by a screen- each of us simultaneously the hero of our own drama, the sidekick in someone's comedy, the villain in a tragedy, and an extra in millions of stories. My fascination with God is in part a recognition that only something that transcends these views of us can possibly know the many and varied aspects we each project into the world, and the (theoretical) synthesis that is a total person.

Human beings are fascinating individually- with each twist and turn of the consciousness creating another aspect that makes a personality unique. We are an infinite combination of our experiences and thoughts, brought together in temporary and flawed perspectives. One might say this study of individual humans falls into psychology, perhaps, but if we begin to categorize, generalize, and study trends, we may end up with more generalizations and prejudices, but do we also have the possibility of true and overarching understanding at the level of a transcendent being? Can we as a race transcend our perspectives, share our camera angles, and see a total person?

Logic and Spirit

I have come to accept my own responsibility in my lack of spirituality over the past decade. I have neglected my own intellectual and spiritual needs in favor of the safer course of professed atheism, and I cannot blame that lack on the culture in which I live- as much as I would like to.

I grew up with a strong connection to spirituality- as if there truly were spirit and meaning in every moment- and separated from it only in my teenage years when I began to explore the ideas and dogmas of the religion that held the roots of my experience. I would have hated to have been in a culture or situation where that revolutionary questioning was more frowned upon than it was. I was lucky in that most of the reason I withdrew from the church was for my own logical and emotional reasons- I have been very lucky to be welcome in almost every venue I have been in- and only excluded by my own decisions and ideas, which I often refrained from sharing with anyone. Simone Weil, a philosopher and activist of turn of the last century, is one I have considered to be a kindred spirit- though she approached the same religious dogmas I did from a different direction and was fascinated by the Christian webs of spirit and dogma.  She also excluded herself from Christianity, and for many of the same reasons. In her Letter to a Priest, she put forth several reasons involving paganism, Judaism, and "modern" culture that kept her from falling head over heels for the Catholic God. In the end, I agreed with her statement:  "There are two atheisms- of which one is a purification of the notion of God."

Since so many philosophers spend their time contemplating a religious side to life, I have always thought that Philosophy and Religion are linked. As a result, I enrolled in a Philosophy degree program in order to better understand the battles in my own brain (any guesses on how well that worked out?).  Perhaps, as I read more and think more, there is more of a war between spirit (religion) and mind (philosophy).  From very early paganism, rational thought has been a detriment to the spiritual knowledge of connections beyond the self. In fact, many of the philosophers who spend their time contemplating the logical reasoning of a higher power end up on the atheist side of the coin. Baruch Spinoza was the first excommunication based on his philosophy (if you don't count the assertion that the world is round as a religious statement)- having been kicked our of the Jewish faith in his 20's. Bertrand Russell was a leading atheist of the early 20th century, whose logic dictated belief, as is true of many (if not all) the atheists of whom I am aware.  Logic alone may be putting too much credit in the human mind. If atheism is the agreed upon logical course, then perhaps we need something more than logic- something more than simply observable fact.

Knowledge is invariably a matter of degree: you cannot put your finger upon even the simplest datum and say “this we know.” – T.S. Eliot

Definitions

Religion:  NOUN 

1. beliefs and worship: people's beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life

2. system: an institutionalized or personal system of beliefs and practices relating to the divine

3. personal beliefs or values: a set of strongly-held beliefs, values, and attitudes that somebody lives by

4. obsession: an object, practice, cause, or activity that somebody is completely devoted to or obsessed by

"The danger is that you start to make fitness a religion."

The definition of religion has changed for me over the years- with much struggle and input from experts like Joseph Campbell and Mircea Eliade, I have come to see that Religion is a code of rules, rituals, and myths to lead the uninitiated to a sense of greater understanding of the community in which we live, in order to create a shared understanding of the deeper aspects of life. By the tricky age of teenager-dom, however, Religion had become for me a rigid method of following rules and regulations, going through the motions of what once inspired people, simply because it is a tradition. Religions vary understandably from community to community, growing larger and more militant as our communities do. This is a creation by humanity in order to explain and control the spiritual world we feel in the depth of what many people call our souls. In the case of my childhood religion, it seemed to be so far removed from my experience that the stories only made sense in translation. The gospels that were read from a pulpit (or from the midst of the congregation) were such outdated stories that the places, the people, and the actions all had to be explained to make any sense of the overarching story.

According to the definition above, one’s own personal beliefs, regardless of number of followers or hierarchical organization can count as religion. “Where two or three gather together in my name, there I am in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20). In the solitary confinement of my own mind, I have my own religion

Spirituality: NOUN 

1. spiritual quality: the quality or condition of being spiritual

2. church property or revenue: the property or revenue belonging to a church or church official ( often used in the plural )

A connection with the deeper reality of our lives, beyond the rational understandings of the physical and logical world is as necessary to me as breathing, though I know it is not as desperate a need for some others. Spirituality is the warmth in the indescribable part of you that somehow makes the pain and anguish of life worthwhile- not just bearable, but somehow necessary and right. The problem of pain and evil is only balanced by a deeper spirituality that can guide me from confusion and anger to acceptance. It is the feeling of being connected to the world while wandering in the woods or watching the waves crash on an untouched beach. It is the beauty of knowing that there is a place in this world created for each of us- and a meaning passed to us from something larger than ourselves.

Church: NOUN 

1. religious building: a building for public worship, especially in the Christian religion

2. religion's followers as group: all the followers of a religion, especially the Christian religion, considered collectively

3. religious service: a religious service that takes place in a church

"go to church"

4. clergy: the clergy as distinct from lay people

5. religious authority: religious authority as opposed to the authority of the state

6. branch of Christian religion: a denomination or branch of the Christian religion

The place where these two can combine is “Church”, which I often use across religious boundaries and in what might be considered inappropriate manners. My Wiccan friends find their churches in the woods, surrounded by trees and the light of the moon. Some find church in large buildings with altars and symbols scattered around them- Temples, Churches, Meditation Houses, and Mosques all fall into the same category. The place is designed to inspire Spirituality, in whatever tradition you find it, and can succeed, if you perceive the symbols and surroundings correctly- in the light of your spirituality and your own traditions.

Religion seems to be the business side of G-d. The rules, the hierarchy, and the stated meanings of myth and symbol are all wrapped up in the “religious” side of things. This boils down to a rational, logical truth (logos) which was ideal in the Greek spiritualties based on the philosophies of the 5^th century BC and before.  This was a drastic change from the mythologies and creation myths of their past, where images and stories were created and distributed for their mythical and archetypal meaning, rather than an analytical truth. Logos was a rebellion against what religion had been in the same time period, and philosophers (notably Socrates) were executed for their logical rather than traditional tendencies. Now, logos has been incorporated into Christianity as an alternate name for the messiah in the creation stories, which is oddly appropriate. Jesus Christ was rebellion personified, following the Greek rationality on a mission to make sense of the mythical world of Judaism, which had required a priestly interpreter for much of Hebrew history. Judaism found their spirituality in the rules they had been given. Their special place as the chosen people was dependent on the rituals, the actions, and the rules of day to day life. In contrast, Jesus was the Greek logos that replaced the rules and regulations with a renewed spiritual existence of self, wrapping the whole of the Religious teachings into the Golden Rule.

If one were to follow the Golden Rule, and move outside of oneself, the rules are only guidelines to spirituality. The rules were all intended to build a community of like-minded spirituality in the only way the ancient beleaguered Hebrew peoples could accomplish it. The Word (Logos) is G-d and was with G-d from the beginning of time.

Sacrificial Celebration

Jesus was crucified. He hung on a cross by the bones of his wrists and his ankles, the nails placed closer together than the natural shape of his body would allow, bending him into a convex and uncomfortable position, forcing his body into shapes that were never meant to be.  By putting his weight on his legs, he could make just enough space in his chest to allow breath to enter his lungs. When his legs gave out from the strain, his wrists held him in agony, burning the breath from his lungs, the flesh from his hands, and the life from his body. It is a long process of humiliation and torture- most of us are at least familiar with the basics by now.

This is the physical pain he was in that is well described in the gospels. What is harder to explain is the mental and religious anguish.

According to his words on the cross (as reported by Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34- interestingly, in slightly different tenses), Jesus is abandoned by G-d, who, he notably does not call Abba at this point.

His relationship with G-d is strained or gone. For this moment, he is an exile. He is fully alone and abandoned- he is human.

I spend much of my time calling “eloi, eloi, lema sabachthanei?” I feel as if I am hanging in torture, and abandoned by the only thing that gives purpose and meaning to the pain. This quotation is left in the Aramaic by Matthew and Mark, making it more probably a direct quote.  In Aramaic, the loss and abandonment of Jesus is translated into Greek for the listeners of the New Testament, but Jesus’ disillusionment on the cross is the deepest connection I feel to divinity.

Passover was last week- the celebration of salvation for the Jewish peoples. In it, we narrowly escape the punishments of the wrathful G-d of early Judaism by sacrificing a lamb and marking the doors of our homes with proof of our sacrifice. We celebrate this today with symbolic Seder meals that provide hours spent contemplating and celebrating the opportunity given by G-d to spare the first born in Jewish homes. Judaism has a strong basis in disaster and finding ways to avert it- from exile to exile, we are the chosen people- chosen to be shaped by the fire of pain, loss, and sacrifice.

Jesus’ exile is ideological, and the Jewish exile is political. Jesus’ exile is personal as the Jewish exile is collective. Is this a side-effect of the tighter focus we have been building in our lives? Is this the first step toward Twitter and Facebook?

Being given the opportunity to be spared because of being chosen- whether as an individual or as a community- is an incredible celebration! We are spared because we follow the law, follow the traditions, and re-enact the salvations of the past. In Passover as with Easter, we are saved from a certain death by our relationship to G-d.

According to the Christian traditions, instead of following a law to achieve salvation, we simply need to follow in the footsteps of Jesus. He came to show us the way- beyond the laws and traditions (which had been building up then and are exponentially larger now)- and into a new world of compassion and understanding for our enemies as well as our loved ones and the members of our tribe.

We all have the opportunity to make sacrifices on the road to salvation and redemption. Perhaps making important sacrifices in our own lives IS the road to salvation and redemption.

Definitions I

Religion:  NOUN 

1. beliefs and worship: people's beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life

2. system: an institutionalized or personal system of beliefs and practices relating to the divine

3. personal beliefs or values: a set of strongly-held beliefs, values, and attitudes that somebody lives by

4. obsession: an object, practice, cause, or activity that somebody is completely devoted to or obsessed by

"The danger is that you start to make fitness a religion."

I have always considered religion to be the governing body of spirit: a code of rules and regulations to lead the uninitiated to a sense of greater peace and understanding in a community we have created for ourselves where there is a shared understanding of the deeper aspects of life. This would be the man-made aspect of the spirit- trying to tame and control the mystical otherness into a process that can be repeated and fostered to teach the uninitiated.  To me, however, Religion with a capital “R” has become a more and more rigid method of following rules and regulations, going through the motions of what used to inspire people, simply because it is a tradition. Religions vary understandably from community to community, growing larger and more militant as our communities do.

Religion also implies the large organizations which purport to act with the will of God, and yet oppress, kill, torture, and destroy. I am not alone in my belief that this type of religion is a painful part of human history, and is a necessary end to having the bureaucratic hierarchy attached to what amounts to be a personal spiritual exercise. The more regulations there are to a dogma, the less I want anything to do with it. That may be some part of my rebellious skepticism; my resistance to being told what to do, but it is also a healthy distrust of power.

"All power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. All great men are bad."

-Lord Acton, 1895

Even the power that is given in the church, and sometimes especially the power that is given in the church, corrupts. As Timothy Keller notes in The Reason for God, the church is the place for those who understand and have fallen victim to sin, who know what it is to be lost and saved, not a place for perfection. In fact, it is much like a rehab center for sinners. Taken in this vein, powerful members of the church can be just as trustworthy as the politicians whose power is entirely man-made.

With or without my own personal bias against organized religion, there seems to be some element of agreement involved- in order to make it something built out of community, we are almost required to have something in common to build upon. There is a need for an initial pact between people in order to build the eventual bureaucratic madness.

“Religion, therefore, as I now ask you arbitrarily to take it, shall mean for us the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider the divine. Since the relation may be either moral, physical, or ritual, it is evident that out of religion in the sense in which we take it, theologies, philosophies, and ecclesiastical organizations may secondarily grow.”

-William James, Lecture II, "Circumscription of the Topic"

If we were to follow the ideas of William James, religion is the over-arching form of the spirit- rather than something experienced in a community, religion is a personal connection and understanding of what lies beneath the realities of the world. Whether you were to understand those realities as painful or ecstatic, the realities are still a cover for something else- something that each person can only define for himself.  To mesh the two ideals, religion is the feelings, acts, and experiences agreed upon in community to have value regarding what is understood to be divine.

How did religion morph from a personal experience (since I think Jesus, Moses, and the Buddha would all agree with William James on this one) to the large construct of Religion?

The Reason for God

There are too many topics in this book to respond without writing a book of my own, so I will have to pick and choose the most beautiful and most painful aspects and flesh each one as it comes. I fully expected this book to be as pedantic and inane as several of the other Christian propaganda items that have been recommended to me over the years. Instead, I found myself wrapped up in the battle between wholehearted agreement with the disillusionment that accompanies the lack of spirituality and the foregone conclusion that Christianity is the only answer to everything- that Christianity will save the world. Other than his conclusion, Timothy Keller’s treatment of Christianity from the inside blew me away- he does not fall back on the clichés of Christianity, like the man who once patted me on the head and said, confidently; “You’ll find the truth”. That pillow of faith which is supposed to explain all lacks in logic is never used in the book, which I appreciate.

Keller acknowledges the pain and disillusionment of the “Me Generation”. As entitled, self-centered adults raised on the concept of self-esteem, we have supreme faith in our own reasoning abilities and moral capacity, whether founded in reality or not. As scientific minds of the new millennium, we look for reason and logic to explain anything that can be definitively said to be “true”.  When we are confronted with a world that does not do what we want, does not react the way we feel is fair, and is somehow beyond our abilities to understand, we rebel. Somehow we did not achieve the goals we set for ourselves, and there is a void remaining in the middle of our souls even if we DID find what we thought would create happiness. In our frustration, many of us have left whatever churches we once called our own- professing that we have been failed by the establishment rather than exploring the possibility that we have failed ourselves. Keller’s church is made up of the skeptics and doubters of New York, whose voices have screamed that frustration in the face of Keller, his church, and Jesus Christ Himself.

Between this and the Varieties of Religious Experience, I feel like the loneliness and disillusionment are over-classified and therefore belittled. The sick soul, as William James calls it, experiences pain in order to find the divine, and would not have found the final peace without the conflict and depression that inspired it. Keller talks about the three major reasons for doubt, which seem to embody all of human experience- intellectual, personal, and “having the right people”, or community-based. I could invent different categories that spanned the whole of my experience, but these will do. However you classify them, each person’s pain is individual and unique, and deserves to be treated as such. I have a sick soul according to William James, and my wrestling with God has lasted most of my life, and I expect no answers. Truth in the divine world is something we can never accomplish, no matter what the objections are. My questions are universal and, to Mr. Keller, it seems they are also childish and common. No matter what the frequency of my arguments, the arguments remain valid in my eyes, and in my heart. God finds me in the questions rather than in the answers.

"[O]ne can never wrestle enough with God if one does so out of pure regard for the truth. Christ likes us to prefer truth to him because, before being Christ, he is truth. If one turns aside from him to go toward the truth, one will not go far before falling into his arms."
— Simone Weil

Having survived his own crisis of faith, researching avidly, and, after finding peace, having consoled enough souls to fill his own church and begin several more, Keller is certainly qualified to guide us through the twists and turns of Christianity. I was swept away by his straightforward explanations of such difficult concepts as the triune God, the divinity and resurrection of Jesus, and the “loving” God of discipline and wrath.

My central issues with Christianity are the only pieces that are required for membership in the club- and I am sure that I am not alone. Jesus being “God”, his resurrection from the dead, and the three gods wrapped into one (Triune God) are simultaneously the most important and the most difficult aspects of the creeds.  If I can think of Christianity as being about compassion, about fulfillment and service to humankind and to the world as a whole, I am a dedicated Christian. Of course, if I think of it that way, I am also a dedicated Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, and many more.

Happy Valentine's Day

The rose is red, the violet's blue
The honey's sweet, and so are you
Thou are my love and I am thine
I drew thee to my Valentine
The lot was cast and then I drew
And Fortune said it shou'd be you

                                -The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes (Oxford University Press, 1951)

Jenny Lewis plays ‘You are What you Love’ on my iPhone as I read the history of St. Valentine’s Day, as best it can be pieced together by the mishmash of authors on Wikpedia.com.  The holiday has a history that reaches back farther than any recorded evidence thereof, and has roots as far back as the 3^rd century AD, when saints by the name of Valentine (of which there were many) were martyred for political reasons. The legend that makes the most sense as the root of the holiday involves Emperor Claudius II of Rome (who shares a birthday with my nephew Manuel). Claudius II personally executed a Valentine, purportedly for marrying young military men when Claudius had decreed that all soldiers were to be single, to keep the distractions from war to a minimum. Valentine supposedly married them to their sweethearts nevertheless. Of course, these stories originate with Chaucer in the 14^th century, and are not terribly reliable.

Whatever the actual history, Valentines have been exchanged for centuries, since the holiday was made popular in 469 AD, even though it was removed from the church calendar in 1969. In Elementary School, it is now compulsory, requiring the children to be fair to one another, one valentine to each child from each child, and the main reason to look forward to it is the candy involved, as an Elementary School holiday. There is no palpitation of the heart when opening the bag of Valentines to see who truly loves you, or comparison of those received slips of Hallmark wonder to determine whose popularity is greatest. Once again, our children are protected from the real world in a democratic, self-esteem building farce.

When I was a child, there was pride in the number of Valentines, just as there were crushed spirits to accompany the empty bag for those least popular children. It was painful and cruel just as much as it was endearing and beautiful. As an adult, I am well used to the crushing side of Valentine’s Day, though I am personally invested in a fantastic relationship. For some of us, the history of crushing pain and loneliness is attached to the day forever. I do find it interesting that a holiday that has made itself a celebration of intimate relationship can have such power to depress people. Everywhere I see and hear people in revolt, rebelling against what has become the silliest holiday in Hallmark’s calendar, as if there is an invisible hand sticking a middle finger in peoples’ faces by its very existence.

I wish for all of you a happy Valentine’s Day, free from the inherent loneliness and the history of anguish implied. I myself intend to celebrate with my husband with dinner and a movie, much like any other date night throughout the year. My celebration is more based on the fact that it is the anniversary of the day Adam proposed to me. He is and will always be my martyred saint.

The Problem of Evil

Evil is a concept that was not introduced to humanity for most of our development, but came out in response to the dark ages in c. 1300-1200 BCE, when many of the world cultures had to start from scratch due widespread destruction. There are scholars who attribute this destruction to the “sea peoples”, though no one really knows what that means. Whatever the causes, Israel, India, China, the Middle East, and Greece had to fight tooth and nail to survive the pressures and come out the other side.

Having done so, they all developed some sort of moral direction in spite of the immoral or amoral gods of their pasts. Danger and pain became something that all of them incorporated into their world views. In Greece, the Myceneans had enjoyed what appears to have been a peaceful and joyous existence (though some have posited a dreadful element of human sacrifice behind the smiling goddesses displayed in the frescos), and were brought down by the forces of evil, leaving the tribes to loosely assemble into the poleis of the 5^th century. In response to this, the culture of the emerging Greeks was tempered by expectations of evil.

Instead of falling into the trap of the Myceneans, and finding that their peaceful existence can be wiped out by surprise at any moment, the tragedies and myths of the Greek peoples tended toward the macabre and intensely emotional. As I have mentioned before, this tendency worked to tie the people together in catharsis, sharing the experiences of fear and pain that would make them into a tighter unit and explain the need for community and government. The other side of it is the basic problem of evil that plagues the religious communities all over the world to this day. The Greeks came to the conclusion that there could be no peace or prosperity, no happiness without the converse agony.

As Americans, we seem to have forgotten this, whether it be truth or not. Whether we like it or not, we were founded on the ideals of the Greek city-state, but did not import the communion aspects of tragedy. We see evil on television- watching the crime dramas and housewives of some state or another, but without the connection to the drama, we are still spoiled. With all the money and time we have, most of us have no experience of personal tragedy at all. How far are we from a world where every evil and pain has been erased by the technologies of the future? And, once it happens, will any of us have a clue what happiness really is?

Perhaps we will squabble over the little things in life rather than appreciating the broader scheme. Perhaps we will find that there is less connection between us than there has ever been before, as our experiences of pain tie us into a cohesive whole.

I certainly don’t know, and the problem of evil continues…

Motivation

We all wish for the easy way out. If only someone could tell us how to make it through the maze of this life- give us the Cliff's Notes, or a secret map, we could navigate it all with ease!
"[We] expect our two-week vacations to be romantic, exotic, cheap, and effortless.. We expect anything and everything. We expect the contradictory and the impossible. We expect compact cars which are spacious; luxurious cars which are economical. We expect to be rich and charitable, powerful and merciful, active and reflective, kind and competitive. We expect to be inspired by mediocre appeals for excellence, to be made literate by illiterate appeals for literacy...to go to 'a church of our choice' and yet feel its guiding power over us, to revere God and to be God. Never have people been more the masters of their environment. Yet never has a people felt more deceived and disappointed. For never has a people expected so much more than the world could offer."
~ Daniel J. Boorstin
Winning the Lottery, Fairy Tale Weddings, A career as a video game tester, whatever the specifics are- we all dream of finding an effortless path to happiness. Instead, we struggle, we sweat, we suffer, and we curse our terrible luck. Where did we ever get the idea that this was supposed to be easy?
Our expectations are based on the self-esteem that has been ingrained in our generation since birth. We expect only the things we deserve- which stops just short of living in Valhalla. American self-esteem has been built up to the point where we think we are capable of anything- we are gods of our own universes, but those universes are separate and diverse, floating in disconnected spheres. We have been deified by our own faith in ourselves- relegating the rest of humanity to second-class citizenry simply because they are not the almighty ME displayed on a pedestal. Especially in this world where our own thoughts and ideas are the ultimate good, we can become anything we want to be.
Jean Twenge wrote a book called Generation Me (highly recommended) detailing how we have become more entitled and assured than ever before, and how all these expectations are dashed, leaving us disappointed and miserable in our adult years as we fail to reach each incredible goal we set as children. When we realize that we cannot be the doctor who teaches 1^st grade and has a Prince Charming and a Happily Ever After, we blame ourselves. Since we take it for granted that we are special, and can make our dreams come true, this realization is a failure. Given the chance to be anything you ever wanted to be, can you choose any one thing?
Meanwhile, the paths of cultural expectation that were once dictated by rituals and practices at proscribed times and in certain ways that marked the doorways between ages- between childhood and adulthood have been camouflaged by the 60's flower children rebelling against the government, the 70's back to land folks rebelling against society, and the 80's yuppies rebelling against the aforementioned rebels. None of us (I hope) mourn the mutilation rituals, and few of us even consider the quests and dreams that mythically taught humanity how to live, but we, as a group, have lost a doorway to becoming a "grown-up". As a result, we have also lost some of what it is to be adult. There is no ritual change to usher in the next step. There is no final approval that suddenly makes us adult and secure in our knowledge of our selves and our world. We are children with no guide, and students who must teach themselves. No job has ever been harder, and never before have so many people wished… for relief from the decisions and expectations we have to set for ourselves. And we're back to the easy way out.
"So long as man remains free he strives for nothing so incessantly and so painfully as to find someone to worship. But man seeks to worship what is established beyond dispute, so that all men would agree at once to worship it…man is tormented by no greater anxiety than to find someone quickly to whom he can hand over that gift of freedom with which the ill-fated creature is born. But only one who can appease their conscience can take over their freedom……peace, and even death, is more attractive to man than the freedom of choice that derives from the knowledge of good and evil"                                                             ~Fyodor Dostoevsky, "The Grand Inquisitor"
Being led as we were as children, knowing the rules and blindly following someone we can trust sounds comforting and safe. Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor points to the things we want to worship- someone to feed us, give us what we need; someone to follow blindly, trusting that the decisions are being made correctly, and there is no need for us to think and decide for ourselves. This is the ultimate easy way out, and a reminder that the easy way out often comes at the price of free will and active thought. If we ever get the things we wish for, our humanity is taken away from us bit by bit.
I remember wishing for the expectations of the tribal world, where the goals and celebrations were measured out for us beforehand- even if those were simply cooking and cleaning for the men who hunt and gather. But these struggles, sufferings, and choices are YOUR choices. Each one makes you more who you are, not less.
"May you live to see your world fulfilled, May you be our link to future worlds, and may your hope encompass all the generations to be. May your heart conceive with understanding, may your mouth speak wisdom and your tongue be stirred with sounds of joy. May your gaze be straight and sure, your eyes be lit with Torah's lamp, your face aglow with heaven's radiance, your lips expressing words of knowledge, and your inner self alive with righteousness. And may you always rush in eagerness to hear the words of One more ancient than all time."
~Talmud, Brachot 17A
There are no teachers of truth, and no curriculum that leads to enlightenment. Each person reaches the depths or heights of their soul alone, and, in a perfect world, finds the companionship of the enlightened world. Siddhartha had to leave the Buddha to find his own truth as teenagers have to leave their parents- Jesus had to break from his home, and be ridiculed in his home town to leave those old expectations behind. Is the goal to be other? I know it is to be more, somehow. We are all looking to find the key into our own souls (if we aren't, we ought to be), and each key is different. There are not steps that will inevitably lead to this knowledge, unless those steps are simply to keep questioning and testing oneself. It's a tough job, but someone has to do it, right?

Compassion

compassion

mid-14c., from O.Fr. compassion , from L.L. compassionem  (nom. compassio ) "sympathy," from compassus,  pp. of compati  "to feel pity," from com-  "together" + pati  "to suffer" (see passion).

Most people do not think of compassion as a political term, but that is how it began, in its purest form, and where the word originated. It has been used in so many different ways over the ages that it has almost lost its meaning. So many religions and service organizations speak of compassion in their fund raising activities that the word is almost synonymous with pity. The superior person has compassion for the nameless poor on the streets, and gives money to an organization to alleviate the guilt brought on by the feeling. The trouble is, compassion has nothing to do with pity, and has no judgment or guilt attached. Compassion is intended for humanity to understand one another at the most basic emotional level.

When the Greeks established the first democracy in Athens around 500 BCE, the government was intended to give power to the people (the poloi, or citizens, who were men who owned property, but let us not be distracted by the misogyny of the past), and this early version of democracy was fully invested in keeping the people happy in whatever way it could. The mental health and commonality of the inhabitants must be maintained if a true democracy is to exist- if the poloi is allowed to fester or falter, if the people are divided, the decisions of the masses are not going to be in the best interest of the society, but only of the individual.

The original meaning of compassion was to feel together; the Athenians were required to attend dramatic and cathartic productions on holidays, and each person, rather than rolling their eyes and suffering through the boredom, invested themselves so fully that the entire group was known to weep openly with the distress of the characters. These plays were not simply the entertainment that we create for ourselves today. Instead, it was structured and regulated to show the political movements of the past year in a way that would draw out the emotions and passions of the audience in sympathy for the enemies, in understanding of horrors far beyond the rational comprehension of the average Athenian.

Compassion, Noun-

    The feeling of distress and pity for the suffering and misfortune of another, often including the desire to alleviate it.

In this age of reality television and internet videos ranging from painful crotch shots to gruesome beheadings, we have distanced ourselves from the horror and pain of what we see on a daily basis. In order to pull at the emotions of the common man today, the passion evoked has to be more extreme by the day, and almost by the hour. Instead of letting ourselves feel things along with those we watch, or opening our hearts to the painful emotions around us, we steel ourselves to it with a jaded worldliness. We remind ourselves on occasion that we need to use a "willing suspension of disbelief" in order for a story to let us feel its message. We remind our children that what they see on television is not real- from the Looney Tunes attempting to murder one another to the Back to the Future movies, where the atomic-power hungry Libians take down the beloved Doc. Our disbelief is ingrained by all this training, and so pervading that we no longer know how to feel compassion.

~ Each of us in our own way can try to spread compassion into peoples' hearts. Western civilizations these days place great importance on filling the human 'brain' with knowledge, but no one seems to care about filling the human 'heart' with compassion. This is what the real role of religion is. ~

  Dalai Lama

The more knowledge we gather, the more distance we give ourselves from the subjects of that knowledge. Watching the reality television shows allows us to laugh at the pain of others rather than identify with it. Amazingly, putting a frame around the television allows us to separate ourselves from the actions in a way that the Greeks would never have even considered. Analyzing the plot, the production value, the special effects, and the acting of the players solidifies our necessary separation and keeps distance between the character and the feeling. We allow ourselves to objectify those human actions and feelings to the point where they no longer resemble the actions and feelings of our selves. My pain is somehow different than any other pain, because it means more. Using the same words to describe my pain and that of Snookie cheapens my experience rather than validating hers. We do the same thing with people who are in front of us- dismissing people as if they were simply fictional characters in the story of our own lives.. How many times have you scrolled past Facebook posts of loneliness, misery, and confusion while barely registering the human feeling behind it?

~ I would rather feel compassion than know the meaning of it ~

  Thomas Aquinas

I have committed myself to compassion with the Charter for Compassion, begun by Karen Armstrong and TED in 2008. The goal is to cross the boundaries of nationality, religion, and prejudice and come to an understanding of our world community. There is no need to join a group or club, send anyone money, or devote your time to the poor and needy, though these are all good ways to get involved. Instead, it asks people to attempt a new way of thinking- a feeling together in order to "break down political, dogmatic, ideological and religious boundaries". More than that, many of us who have felt so alone in this digital world can have the opportunity to connect to one another in a way that seems to be vanishing from our human concept of society.