Religion: solution to the world's rich-poor gap?

In your opinion, have our earthly theologies provided humanity with effective guidance on how to live together in peace and harmony?

Here's my opinion: No. In fact, far too often they have produced just the opposite result.

Today 400 children die of starvation every hour. Every hour. Yet it would be possible to feed all the starving children on the planet, to protect them from dying of preventable diseases, and to make basic education accessible to all, with no more than 5% of the overall annual sales of arms in the world.

Five per cent.

Can this be possible?

Yes. It's possible and it's true.

How is this evidence of a failure of religions and theologies? Neglect of its own offspring to the point of starvation could only occur in a society whose people see themselves as separate from God and separate from each other, having little to do with each other, and this is what is taught by our religions. Only such a cultural story could justify a world in which the income of the richest 225 people is equal to the income of three billion poor people.

You may have missed the real impact of that, so let me say it again. We have created a world in which the income of the richest 225 people is equal to the income of three billion poor people.

Three billion.

That's half the world's population.

What's so wrenchingly sad about all of this is not only that the situation exists, but that so many people think it's okay that it exists. You tell them that the income of the richest 225 people is equal to the income of three billion poor people and they say, "Uh-huh. Okay. So what's the problem?"

Want to know why there's so much unrest and violence in the world today? Open your eyes.

Perhaps you already have. Perhaps you already know. Perhaps you understand. Yet it will take more of us understanding, and then deciding to do something about what we understand, for anything to change. If only more of us could open our eyes to the world around us! If only more of us could see our world as an expression of our oneness.

If only our theologies could help more of us do more of this more of the time. But in fact it is our theologies that keep us from experiencing the reality of our oneness, and teach us of separation. And it is our ideas of separation that allow such conditions to continue to exist.

If theology was a physical science--biology, say, or physics--I believe that its data would long ago have been judged unreliable in producing consistent results, even after thousands of years. At the very least, that data would now be questioned.

Does humanity have the courage to question its own data about life and about God? Are humans brave enough to ponder the unaskable What if?

What if something very important that humans think they know about God is simply inaccurate? Would that change anything?

How much more will people allow themselves to endure before they begin looking for the underlying reason that the world is the way it is? And, of those people who say that a belief in God is powerful enough to be the cure for the world's ills, how many are able to see that an inaccurate belief could be powerful enough to be the cause?

How about you? Where are you with all of this? Given the state of the world today, do you think this may be a good moment to consider some new thoughts about God, about life, and about each other?

How is your own life going? Are things just fine? Or are you meeting more challenges than, frankly, you'd like to be encountering in your relationships, in your career, in your day-to-day movement through life?

As you look at your life and as you look at the world around you, do you think you are seeing a reflection of What God Wants? If not, what do you think that God does want?

from neale's blog

...i so agree with a foreigner commenting on his first visit in the Philippines: "There is too much God and yet too much of poverty."

saan nga ba dumadaloy ang pagiging makaDiyos nating mga Pilipino? bakit pagkatapos ng ilang dekada, ang mga mahihirap, mahihirap pa rin at parang mga kabuteng dumami ng dumami. pero hindi ito nakikita ng mga nasa alta sosyedad. lalo na ng mga nasa kapangyarihan para baguhin ito. bakit napakahirap para sa ating gobyerno magpagawa ng disenteng bahay para sa maralita? bakit mas gusto nilang makita ang daralita sa ilalim ng tulay, sa gilid ng dagat, sa tabi ng ilog na kasingdumi ng burak?

bakit mahirap ipatupad ang libreng healthcare para sa masa? bakit napakahirap magpa-aral ng mga magulang sa kanilang mga anak? bakit hinahayaan nating mangyari ito sa ating kapwa? isa lang din ang rason na nakikita ko: wala tayong pakialam kasi di naman natin kapamilya at kapuso sila. at ito ang separation theology na sinasabi ni Neale. ito ang dahilan bakit wala tayong pakialam kasi akala natin iba sila, hindi natin sila kauri, hindi kasama, hindi kaibigan, hindi kamag-anak. nakalimutan natin ang sinabi ni Hesus: "we are all brothers and sisters and whatsoever you do to the least of your brethren, you do it unto me." si Hesus kasi alam nya na kaparte, kabahagi, kapamilya, kapuso, kaibigan, kapatid ang bawat isa. para sa atin 'ibang tao' sila. yun ang pinakamalaking pagkakaiba natin kay Hesus.

when we start to look at every person we meet as part of ourselves....that would be the day that we bring back peace on earth. peace at last! sana simulan natin ito NGAYON.

pagbuot it Dios

gakangawa ako ham-an it kung may big happening sa kabuhi it tawo like nakit-an sa regular check up nga may mass imong cells ag malignant kinahangean nga operahan eagi mabatian ko gid dayon sa tawo "hay, alinon ko ay daya ro kagustuhan it Dios?"

kung battered wife ka, hambaeon man kimo "hay, alinon ko ay daya a ro gintao it Dios kakon?"

kung owa ka kapasar sa Board exam mahambae ka man "a bukon a siguro it daya ro pagbuot it Dios para kakon."

may mangutana ngani ham-an it owa ka pa gaasawa ay magueang ka eon? most often than not sabat it tawo: "hay alinon ko ay daya a siguro ang kapalaran."

hay..........tama ba ang pagkaintindi ko nga Dios ro may kagustuhan nga magkacancer ka? nga Dios ro dahilan ham-an it gamasakit ka? nga Dios ro nagtao kimo it sakit. meaning to say, ginakalipay it Dios nga makit-an ka nga ga suffer? tsk, tsl, tsk. ano nga klase it Dios ing kilaea ngaron kung makaruyon gali imaw? dahil ako gapati sa ang Dios nga maeoeoy-on, mapinalanggaon ag owa ako gapati nga ginataw-an na ako it masakit para magsuffer ako in pain. my God is much more than that! gapati ako nga kung ano ang ginusto sa ang kabuhi, ginusto man it Dios para kakon dahil ako ag ro Dios sambilog eang. tan-awa ngani hambae na gintaw-an ta kamo it free will para magdesisyon para sa inyong kabuhi. ag ro free will ngaron hay minatuod nga free para kakon. no ifs and no buts, simply free....will. so kung ano nga klase it kabuhi ro ginusto mo, ikaw ro naghimo karon ag bukon it baeasueon ro Dios in the end.

this morning while i was bathing and during breakfast i've heard my Goddess whispered: "i am the way and the destination."

in deed! She is all of life. and no thing is outside of God.

is Jesus our savior?

CwG Reader's Question: Dear Neale:..I have always believed that Jesus was a savior to all mankind. After reading CWG, I'm not sure. What is the truth as you know it? Craig, Williamstown, NJ.

Neale's Response: Dear Craig, You've asked what many consider to be the central question of the century. The impact of Jesus' life was so extraordinary, it will never be forgotten. That is because Jesus was-is-a savior to all mankind. As are you and I.

Now, the difference between you and me and Jesus is that he donned the mantle, wore the cloak, accepted the responsibility. Most of us have not. In that sense, Jesus is our savior. For he did with his life what very few of us have done with ours. He did what we all came here to do! And in so doing it, he "saved" us from the necessity of doing it at all, if we do not wish.

Let me explain. We have all come to save the world. Not from the "snares of the devil," or from "everlasting damnation." (As CWG teaches, there is no such thing as the devil, and damnation does not exist.) We have come to save the world from its own mistaken notion of itself.

We are, right now, living in a world of our own creation, a non-truth, an experience which has nothing to do with ultimate reality, or with Who We Really Are. Jesus knew this. He also knew Who He Really Was. And he declared it, for all to hear. He declared something else as well. He said that what he did on the earth, we could do also.

Some people do not believe this. They cannot believe that they could be given-indeed, that they have been given-the same abilities as Jesus. Yet this level of faith is the key to experiencing those gifts. That is what Jesus taught. That was his central message. I think a careful reading of the following pages (CWG Book 1) would help provide clarity for you about this: pages 52, 55, 67, 86, 180 and 197.

I wrote a booklet, Recreating Yourself, which addresses much of this directly. In it, I make the point that it was Jesus himself who said, "According to your faith be it unto you." It was Jesus himself who said, "0 woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt." And the woman's daughter was made whole from that very hour. And it was Jesus himself who said, "If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you." Still, if you cannot believe in yourself and in your own divine heritage (and because so many people cannot), Jesus, in an act of enormous love and compassion, invites you to believe in him.

"Verily, verily I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it."

Isn't that an extraordinary promise? So great and so complete was Jesus' understanding of who he was, and of who you are ("I and my Father are one" he said, and later, "all ye are brethren"), that he knew deeply there was no limit to what you could do if you believed in yourself, or in him. Could there be a mistake about Jesus' declarations here?

Could there be a misinterpretation? No. His words are very clear. He wanted you to consider yourself one with the Father, exactly as he is one with God. So great was his love for all humankind, and so full was his compassion at their suffering, that he called upon himself to rise to the highest level, to move to the grandest expression of his being, in order to present a living example to all human beings everywhere. And then he prayed that we would not only see the evidence of his oneness with the Father, but our own as well.

"And for their sakes I sanctify myself that they also might be sanctified through the truth. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one."
You can't be much clearer than that.

Conversations with God tells us that all of us are members of the Body of God, though we imagine ourselves to be separate, and not part of God at all.

Christ understood our difficulty in believing that we were part of God, part of God's very body. Yet Christ did believe this of himself. It was therefore a simple matter (and a marvelous inspiration) for him to invite those who could not imagine themselves to be a part of God to imagine themselves to be a part of him. For he had already declared himself to be a part of God, and if we could simply believe that we were a part of Christ, we would by extension necessarily be a part of God.

Jesus must have emphasized this point many times, because the record of his teachings, and the commentaries upon them in the Bible contain countless references to this relationship. String just a few of these separate references together and you have an extraordinary revelation:

I and my Father are one. (John 10:30)

And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one. (John 17:22)

I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one. (John 17:23)

That the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them. (John 17:26)

So we, being many, are one body in Christ; and every one members one of another. (Romans 12:5)

Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one. (1 Corinthians 3:8)

For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. (1 Corinthians 10:17)

For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or gentiles, whether we be bound or free; and have been all made to drink into one spirit for the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? (1 Corinthians 12-16)

But now are they many members, yet but one body. (1 Corinthians 12:20)

All of us are members of the Body of Christ. All of us are the Christed One. And if Christ is one with God, so, too, are we. We simply do not know it. Refuse to believe it. Cannot imagine it.

Yet it is not true that going through Jesus is required in order to be going with Jesus. Jesus never uttered such words, nor did he come close. That was not his message. His message was: If you cannot believe in me, if you do believe that I am who I say I am, what with all that I have done, then you will never, ever believe in yourself, in who you are, and your own experience of God will be virtually unattainable. Jesus said what he said, did what he did-performed miracles, healed the sick, raised the dead-even raised himself from the dead-that we might know Who He Was...and thus know also Who We Really Are. It is this second part of the equation which is most often left out of the traditional doctrine about Christ.

You see, Jesus is our savior, to the degree that he has saved us from the illusion of our own separation from God. Jesus is the Son of God, as are we all. As we teach in our workshops: You have come to the room to heal the room; you have come to the space to heal the space. There is no other reason for you to be here.

ways to change the world

An anti-abortion Republican in the white house for 8 years has not slowed abortions. It seems to me that its merely a selling point. While I am "pro-life" I do believe that prohibition has never stopped people from doing anything they want. If someone wants to abort, drink alcohol, smoke pot, do drugs, prostitute themselves, they will always find a way... except that it will introduce a whole new set of problems in society.
Holland has it right. The following is excerpted from "Collective conscience breeds Dutch tolerance" by David Morris:
Amsterdam Judge Ruter says, "You cannot solve social problems by making them taboo." The Dutch don't drive their human weaknesses underground. The minister of justice of Holland's conservative gov't says, "The aim is to prevent as much as possible a situation in which more harm is caused by criminal proceedings than by the activity itself."
Legalization allows the gov't more flexibility than criminalization. A prostitute undergoes regular health exams and measures are taken to prevent disease. One result is an astonishing low rate of AIDS infection: less than 1% as compared to America's illegal but plentiful prostitute population at 30-40%. Allowing prisoners conjugal visits with loved ones reduces prison tension and curbs aggressive in-prison homosexuality.
Marijuana loses much of its attraction to young people because its no longer forbidden, making it into an unsensational item. In fact, the proportion of teenage users in Holland is a fraction of US use and crack is virtually non-existent. Also the violent druglords are taken out of the picture. ...i guess the more you label a thing as illegal, more and more people are drawn to it. Indeed, why don't we allow drugs to be legally available? Government will make money out of it instead of the druglords. Years of campaigning against use of illegal drugs didn't reduce drug addicts.
Dutch schools teach sex education and birth control pills are cheap and available. Yet Dutch girls are no more sexually active than American girls. Holland's teen-age pregnancy rate is 1/7th that of America's. American teenagers have 12 to 14 times more abortions than Dutch teens. ...i, myself would campaign that sex education be taught in schools as early as pre-school in the terms that they can understand and would push for a cheaper birth control pills. i believe it is more irresponsible to raise a child when you, yourself didn't even manage to enjoy your teenage years. what kind of a child are you raising then? will she be part of the world's solution or a problem? i don't agree that young preggies should abort their babies but it could have been avoided if they were educated on sex and sexual activities.
The Dutch treat prostitutes, drug addicts, teen-age pot smokers and the terminally ill with respect. Not surprisingly, respect breeds responsibility, not license. The heroin addict uses a clean needle. The prostitute does not transmit disease. The teen uses birth control.
The Dutch's sense of mutual respect and collective responsibility is deeply rooted. In the 1600s they were the most prosperous nation on earth. Riches breed a "collective conscience" that demanded generosity for the needy and tolerance for those with different religions and different habits. Obligations to community, to society came first. The 300-year tradition continues. They know the most fertile breeding ground for irresponsible behavior is the slum. They offer the wold's most comprehensive social support programs. (i wish Philippine government can do the same)
This prosperous country of 14 million has much to teach us, for tolerance has never been an American trait. We have a long history of demanding moral purity of our neighbors and eagerly locking them up if they transgress. We rely on force to solve our social problems, not wisdom.
Today, America imprisons a larger portion of its citizens than any country except South Africa. The Dutch watch in amazement our descent into social anarchy. They cannot understand why a nation would willfully destroy itself to control its citizens' personal behavior.
some thoughts of 'Susan'

death

Many humans have been told that What God Wants is for their wonderful life to eventually end, at which time their opportunity to learn and to grow is over and the time to be rewarded or punished for how they have lived begins.

One result of this teaching: Many humans consider that death is a terrible thing, and something to be feared. It's the End of the Line, the Final Curtain Call, the Closing Bell. Nearly all of the imagery surrounding death are negative, fearful, or sad, not positive, uplifting, or joyful. These imagery pervade our society. A street that goes nowhere is a Dead End. A person who is badly mistaken is Dead Wrong. The spirit who comes to retrieve your soul is The Grim Reaper.

Most people do not want to even talk about death, much less experience it. No one wants to experience it before he or she has to. People cling to life, sometimes desperately. The survival instinct is the strongest human instinct of all. Our common culture supports survival as the ultimate goal. Even people who want to die are not allowed to.

On the other side of death, many people feel certain, is the Final Judgment. If you have not been good, it's at this point that you'll go to hell. Your payment for all of your sins in this way is What God Wants.

Humanity's list of What God Wants is very long and covers many other areas of human experience not discussed in the past three installments here. That list forms the basis of innumerable civil laws, cultural traditions, social mores, and familial customs that touch all human beings.

Is this basically what you remember being taught about What God Wants?

If it is, you have a lot of company. Millions of people have had the same experience.

Nay, billions.

morality

Many humans have been told that What God Wants is a moral society.

One result of this teaching: Humanity has spent its entire history attempting to define what is moral and what is not. The challenge has been to come up with a standard for society that does not change, all the while the society itself is changing. To find this "gold standard," many societies have turned to God, or Allah, or Yahweh, or Jehovah, or whatever other name they have used to designate Deity, and have relied on their understanding of What God Wants.

Many centuries ago God's preferences in this matter were given a powerful label. They were called "natural." This is because the concept of a Deity first entered the minds of primitive humans as a result of their earliest observations of and contacts with Nature. Here was something bigger than they were, something they could not control, something they could only stand by and watch, hoping for the best.

"Hoping for the best" soon transmuted into what would now be called praying. Whoever and whatever this Deity was, early humans reasoned, it was deeply connected with Nature, and Nature was an expression of It. And so humans created gods representing the sun, moon, and stars, the weather, crops, rivers, the land, and nearly everything else, in hopes of getting some control over things--or at least getting some communication going with whoever did have control.

From this connection of God and Nature it was only a short mental hop to consider that all things having to do with deities and gods were "natural," and all things not having anything to do with deities were "unnatural." When human language came into form the words "God" and "Nature" became inextricably linked. Certain conditions, circumstances, and behaviors were then described as "natural" or "unnatural," depending upon whether they adhered to or violated the current perception of the Will of God.

That which is "unnatural" has, in turn, come to be described as "immoral"--since it's not of God, and cannot, therefore, be What God Wants. The circle thus completes itself. Anything that is not considered "natural" is considered "immoral." That includes all "unnatural" abilities, powers, behaviors--and even thoughts.

The idea that What God Wants is what is natural, and that what is natural is what is moral, has not been a perfect measure, but it has been the best that humanity has been able to do in the search for an unchanging standard. It's for this reason that humanity has been loath to change its ideas about What God Wants. Changing those ideas changes the gold standard of human behavior.

Behavior is the currency of human interaction. Beliefs about What God Wants gives value to the behavioral choices of humans, just as gold gives value to the pieces of paper called money.

Thus, in most human societies it's not an individual's actual experience, but the society's definition of it, that determines its morality. This is the case with homosexuality. It's also the case with a great many other behaviors, such as prostitution, premarital sex, depictions of explicit sexual activity, the use of peyote, marijuana, and other plants and stimulants, or even the experience of ecstasy not induced by any outside stimulant.

For instance, if one says one has had an ecstatic experience of God, but if the experience does not fall within what humanity currently defines as "natural," it's considered immoral and to be warned against and, if it's continued, to be condemned, and, if it's still continued, to be punished.

In previous times it was often punishable by torture or death. More than one saint claiming and describing such ecstasies has been martyred in humanity's long history, using such guidelines.

Those saints were killed because the people killing them were convinced that they were doing What God Wants.

suffering

Many humans have been told that What God Wants is for suffering to be used by human beings to better themselves, and to purify their soul. Suffering is good. It earns credits, or points, in God's mind, especially if it's endured silently, and maybe even "offered up" to God. Suffering is a necessary part of human growth and learning and is, more importantly, a means by which people may be redeemed in the eyes of God.

Indeed, one whole religion is built on this belief, asserting that all beings have been saved by the suffering of one being, who died for the sins of the rest. This one being paid the "debt" said to be owed to God for humanity's weakness and wickedness. According to this doctrine, God has been hurt by the weakness and wickedness of humanity and, in order to set things straight, someone has to suffer. Otherwise, God and humanity could not be reconciled. Thus, suffering was established as a redemptive experience.

With regard to the suffering of human beings due to "natural" causes, it's not to be shortened by death under any circumstances that are not also "natural." The suffering of animals may be mercifully ended before "natural" death, but not the suffering of people. It's God and God alone who determines when human suffering shall end.

One result of this teaching: Human beings have endured unimaginable suffering over extended periods in order to do God's will and not incur God's wrath in the Afterlife. Millions of people feel that even if a person is very, very old and is suffering very, very much--lingering on the verge of death but not dying, experiencing interminable pain instead--that person must endure whatever life is bringing them.

Humanity has actually created civil law declaring that people have no right to end their own suffering, nor may they assist another in ending theirs. However anguishing it may be, however otherwise hopeless a life may have become, the suffering must go on.

This is What God Wants. Is this really so?

free will

Many humans have been told that What God Wants is for human beings to have Free Will. Thus, they may determine and decide for themselves which of the Ultimate Outcomes--heaven or hell--they wish to experience after their death. They may do as they choose at any moment, at every juncture. They are not restricted in any way.

Humans have been told that God has granted humanity this Free Will so that humans may freely choose God, freely choose God's Way, and freely choose to be reunited with God in heaven. In other words, they may freely choose to be good, as opposed to being forced to do so. God wants humans to return to God by choice. No one should be required to do so.

Human beings have also been told that under the doctrine of Free Will, while people may do as they choose, if they do not choose What God Wants they'll pay for it with continuous torture through all eternity. No element of duress is seen in this. It's simply the Way Things Are. It's Justice, at the highest level. It's God's Justice, which follows God's Judgment. It's important, therefore, to freely choose What God Wants.

One result of this teaching: Humanity's concept of freedom has been deeply affected and profoundly shaped by its understanding of what God means by "freedom." Humans have decided that freedom doesn't have to mean freedom, but can mean simply the ability to select outcomes.

This is better than having no choice at all, and so humans in positions of power have learned to use the word "freedom" to privately describe the process by which they get others to do as they are told. People don't have to do as they are told, of course. But if they do not, there will be a price to pay. That could mean anything from having taxes audited to being thrown in jail for two years without charges being filed and without any explanation other than being labeled a threat to the security of the country. Using this measure, nations call themselves "free."

Most people, except, perhaps, the most stubborn apologists, see the contradiction in all of this. They understand perfectly well that no people are truly free who face the most horrendous outcomes imaginable if they don't do what they're told. Only a hypocrite or a fool would call such a choice "free."

Humans have learned, then, that hypocrisy--especially hypocrisy for the "right" purpose, in the "right" cause--is acceptable on earth as it is in heaven. Much of humanity's political activity has been informed by this ethic. And elsewhere within the spectrum of human activity as well, in the way many humans communicate with each other, in the way many deal with each other, it has come to be understood that the end justifies the means.

In fact, many humans have now convinced themselves that none of this is hypocrisy at all. It's simply a matter of interpretation.

And so, in this day and age, freedoms are taken away in the name of Freedom itself. Millions of people gratefully embrace the political rhetoric that says lack of freedom is what guarantees their freedom, and the religious doctrine that says their choices in life are free only if they do as they are told, because this is What God Wants.