Reflections

Nature's God Church Blog

Archive for June, 2009

Through Deist eyes

Posted by Reflections on June 24, 2009

The people who get on in this world are the people who get up and look for the circumstances they want, and, if they can’t find them, make them. — George Bernard Shaw, playwright

How does Deism help us live better lives and be better people? I think reason, nature and experience are key not only to Deism, but to life itself. Take the quote above. There is nothing particularly Deistic about it at first glance. But think further. We are born with intelligence and reasoning powers. They are part of our human nature. Ingenuity, inventiveness and imagination are part of our nature. We also have many negative qualities in our natural makeup. There are, unfortunately, people who sit on their backside and let opportunity pass them by. Then they complain about how unfair life is. What makes sense? I believe that using reason to recognize and emphasize the positive qualities over the negative makes us better persons and makes the human race better across the board. Deists just require their religion to make sense along with everything else they choose.

As mankind has seen the advantages that cooperation brings, we have long gathered together and built societies. When hunter-gatherers saw the advantages agriculture provided, civilization was born. It is in our nature to try to make life better, and the general direction for the development of  our civilization has been to the better. Individually and collectively, we sometimes misstep, and something that we think will lead to making our lives better actually makes things worse. We learn from our experiences, and try not to make the same mistakes twice. When we fail to learn from our experiences, we regress as individuals and as a species.

If you are a Deist, try this experiment. Take a quote that you find meaningful, one that rings true and offers wisdom. Better yet, make sure that quote is an affirmation, something very positive. Look at that quote through Deist eyes. How can your chosen bit of wisdom improve your life? Is it consistent with your Deist worldview? What does this exercise tell you about your worldview? This exercise will take practice. It is worth the time. Remember: it is your understanding of life, nature and God that counts with Deism. With organized religions you are supposed to just accept your religion’s tenets and views as your own. Not doing so is “wrong”. It is a sin to not believe exactly as you are told. You must believe what someone else tells you is the word of God. Acceptance of tenets or dogma is not optional if you want to remain true to an organized religion’s beliefs. Such is not the case with Deism. You are responsible for deciding what makes sense to you. To me, believing nonsense is just not an attractive prospect. I will decide which principles I should live by, ones that are best for me, my family and, in my opinion, for society. Interestingly, when given the choice, a Deist tends to make choices that are similar to those of other Deists. That makes sense. What is reasonable is reasonable. Still, we Deists have the freedom of choice. We are servants only to reason and common sense, not to a church or a sacred text or anything the clergy claims to be the will of God.

As we progress in our Deist spirituality we grow in many ways. M. Scott Peck describes four stages of human spiritual development. By Peck’s definition, Deists would be at Stage III on the path to enlightenment. Peck was a Christian, not a Deist, but in his definition of Stage III, he describes Deism perfectly. So if by becoming Deists we achieve Stage III spirituality, how then do we progress to Stage IV (which seems desirable)?

Peck uses Christian, Sufi and Zen mystics as examples of Stage IV spirituality, but when we examine his definition for Stage IV – … the stage where an individual starts enjoying the mystery and beauty of nature. While retaining skepticism, he starts perceiving grand patterns in nature… – we see a clear path for Deists to progress spiritually. I can, for instance, look back now at Christianity with a certain serenity and acceptance, not of the literalist and fundamentalist view of Christ, but the wonderful lessons that we can learn from the Christ story. Christ’s message is part of the overall celebration of our human spirituality. As Peck puts it, “not …mythological stories interpreted as literal accounts, but rather as one loving the whole, the outcasts, overcoming prejudices, incorporating inclusiveness and unconditional love, this, with the courage to be as oneself – that is what I must follow for my salvation.” In Peck’s description we see that we don’t have to have some special or magical redemption to arrive at salvation.

When Deists look at the world through eyes that understand that nature is the ultimate arbiter in life, and reason is the best way to make sense of things, we come to many realizations. We begin to understand that no one has a monopoly on truth. If anyone tells you that they do possess the only real truth, they are probably telling to think just like they do. I think that as we progress spiritually we find that natural religion is the basis for all religion. Even the revealed religions have a lot of value if we discard the literalist and fundamentalist interpretations that have been supplied by the clergy over the years. And then as we grow as Deists I think we find that even reason is not enough. Some people cannot distinguish reason from rationalization. When we open our Deist eyes to all the possibilities we begin to see our commonalities with other belief systems. I believe we become less judgmental, more intuitive and more accepting. When we look at life through Deist eyes we come to know that nature is speaking to us, just not with words. I believe that is how God communicates; otherwise, how would we hear? What language would God use?

The most spiritual people I know attain a type of serenity that tells you they have moved past religious strife and conflict. The most spiritual people I know don’t get hung up on literal interpretations of any religious texts. They lead by example, and you end up wanting to follow them. You follow because what they say rings true to you. And when you look at these spiritual people through Deist eyes you tend to choose those whose message not only rings true, but it also is grounded in common sense. That is our Deist heritage.

always always

Posted in Deism, Life, Nature, Philosophy, Religion, Spirituality | Leave a Comment »

Love

Posted by Reflections on June 3, 2009

Love is the most important and positive human emotion. Love motivates us in many ways, and there are many types of love. There are also many emotions and urges we may mistake for love.

M. Scott Peck defines love as “the willingness to unselfishly extend yourself in order to serve the spiritual growth of another human being.” But Peck also tells us up front that he feels that love is “too large, too deep to ever be understood or measured or limited within the framework of words.” We cannot explore all the profound possibilities of love here in this short work, but I can try to look from a Deist’s perspective at a few facets of the jewel that we call human love.

Robert Heinlein described love as “a subjective condition in which the welfare and happiness of another person are essential to one’s own happiness.” I have spoken before about two types of happiness, feel-good happiness that we get from pleasurable things and value-based happiness that comes from finding and fulfilling one’s true purpose or by accomplishing something significant or worthwhile. I believe that we experience both types of happiness when we love according to Heinlein’s definition.

Falling in love in the romantic sense has a physical element to it. There is always some degree of sexual attraction involved. That is good for the perpetuation of the species, but such love does not always last. Commitment is difficult for some people, and the giving of oneself can be even more difficult. It takes time and hard work to understand that making another person happy is the key to your own happiness. Selfish love is shallow, if it is love at all. Concentrating on someone else’s happiness is ultimately more rewarding than focusing on yourself. If that other person can return your love just as deeply, you will experience greater happiness than you can ever find on your own.

When we love deeply, we get to know someone better than we’ve ever known another person before. We lower our barriers and drop many or most of our inhibitions in such an intensely close relationship. We learn which actions lead to which responses. We learn how to elicit pleasurable and joyful responses, and we also learn what brings pain to our partner. We must be extremely careful with such knowledge. We have the power to produce strong reactions in our partners, and we can cause enormous damage when we become angry or try to be controlling if we use this power inappropriately.

We can be blinded by love, or at least we can be so consumed by passion, desire, need, longing and other deep feelings that we [i]think [/i]are love that we can ignore important danger signals. Sometimes the object of our desire (which we are certain is love) does not respond in kind with feelings and acts borne out of true love. Inconsiderate lovers can take advantage of our love, sometimes for years, only to show us their true colors at a time of their choosing, an act that can wound us deeply. When we give our hearts we must be careful not to lose our heads.

Love of family is a very different kind of love with no sexual overtones. We still care for our siblings and children. We are committed to their welfare and happiness, because these things are essential to our own happiness. When a relative is hurting, we also feel the pain. Often, we will sacrifice our own happiness for the welfare of family, especially our children. We are protective, sometimes too much so; we can inhibit our family members’ development by smothering them and preventing them from becoming independent. We can be domineering and controlling if we think that it is in their best interests to force them to follow a path of our choosing. There is much truth in the old saying: “If you love something, you should let it go. If it comes back, it is yours forever. If not, it was never meant to be.” We must be careful when choosing the time to let go, but with family, we must let go at some point. Sometimes we grow apart from family, and they from us. Love is usually still there, but it can grow cold. In rare cases, love for a family member can be lost if the rift should become too deep. This is not a normal situation, and there is normally some dysfunction involved when a close family tie is broken.

To me love for parents is different still than for other relatives. Our love for parents (those who fulfill the custodial parental role) will always be special. They raised us and taught us what it is to be the people we grow into. Under normal circumstances we accord our parents a type of respect that we reserve for our best teachers. We seek and consider their advice even after we become adults. We recognize all they have provided us: the sustenance, the nurturing, the counseling, the discipline, the comfort, all the things that allowed us to survive, thrive and become independent beings. When the love that should exist between parent and child is dysfunctional, a broken human being can result.

What about love of friends and neighbors, love for our fellow man? How strong should such love be? How much love can we and should we extend to strangers? Is “love” the right word?

Let’s look first at love for friends. Friends are people we like. We share interests and experiences, and we share our time and our lives with our friends. Our circle of friends is almost an extension of our family. Our friends can become as close as brothers and sisters, so our love for friends can be as close as love for family.

Love for neighbor is an important distinction. We are social animals. We live together in societies. Living in close proximity means that we have neighbors. These are people who share our experience. They may become friends, but whereas we choose our friends, we do not necessarily choose our neighbors. We may find that we do not share many interests, and we may not become friends, but the quality of our community depends on all of us who live together in neighborhoods.

I have known one of my neighbors for years. We are not close friends, but we talk, we share experiences, we do things for one another with no expectation of repayment. My other neighbors have mostly moved here fairly recently. We have never gotten to know one another. I volunteer in our community, and I am pretty well known, but I don’t find a lot of closeness in our neighborhood right now. Frankly, there are not too many ties that bind us. We get in our cars, and we go to work at many different places of employment. Our problems are pretty much our own. Our kids are of many different ages. They don’t associate or play together or necessarily even go to school together. In fact, there is not too much in our neighborhood or our community that brings us together. I have to admit that right now I am closer to people who live hundreds or even thousands of miles away than I am to people who live only hundreds of feet away. What does this say about the quality of our communities? What does this mean for love of neighbor? It depends on where you live, and it depends on how much you go out of your way to get to know and love your neighbor. It also depends on how you define community and neighborhood. I find that my neighborhood is global. It is defined by the places where I choose to communicate, not on the physical locations where I choose to live and work.

And love for strangers? I think we should always treat strangers with a respect that shows that we are loving persons. I believe in going out of my way to show kindness, expecting nothing in return. Ann Landers is not necessarily a great philosopher, but I think she got it right when she said, “Keep in mind that the true measure of an individual is how he treats a person who can do him absolutely no good.” Kindness is a virtue, even if you are never repaid directly. Your act of kindness may result in a better attitude and outlook in someone who is kind in return to someone else. Such kindness can be infectious. Selfless acts build character. Loving acts improve us as a species.

Love for God? That is yet another kind of love. Of the varieties of love we have already covered, the type that most resembles love for God is love for parents. God is our provider. Many people equate God with Divine Providence. But love for God can include much more: admiration, gratitude and reverence, which includes profound, adoring respect and honor, even awe. And I believe very strongly that anger, jealousy and fear have no place in our relationship with God. I fail to understand why God would be afflicted with these terrible human flaws.

Deism is all about nature and reason and making sense. Loving kindness makes sense, even if it is not repaid. When we sow the seeds of love and kindness, we do not know when they will sprout and take root. Still, the sowing is worth the effort. The seeds may fall on harsh and infertile territory and never germinate. But the worse tragedy is for fertile soil to never be kissed by the seed of kindness and to remain barren for want of love.

Posted in Life, Nature, Philosophy, Religion, Spirituality | Leave a Comment »