The talk of god, is in reality talking about nature. Nothing can exist without nature allowing it to. If we are going into the era of miracles, it is impossible to consider without them, they are so common that we consider them very mundane, we don't see the forest for the trees. Isn't there some brilliance in the birth of a new baby, whether it is one of your own or of a friend or even a dog, cat or a bird. If you want to think those miracles, think about how radios, TVs or Computers are made, they have to be planned very carefully, and all the components connected properly, then they have to be connected to power. And only work when they have power generated by some other means. Sure cameras can “see” and put imagines on a card etc, but you cannot point any human built device that has all the properties of either human, animal, bird, reptile, fish or bacteria. If that is God, I'll take it. If you are wondering where churches of religion come into this, In the King John's bible, in the gospel acording to St Matthew, read chapter 23, along with some other parts, it might give you some ideas about the religions.

"Then a Christian friend commented that social and political projects in which I had chosen to be involved displayed all the hallmarks of Jesus' teachings."

Miraculous. A revelation! A Christian seizing the opportunity to distort reality such that it fits the writings of gospels, unconfirmed as accurate. Why shirk other gospels? Why shirk Judas' gospel? Why not ask *questions* - demand evidence?

Had you asked for one example that cannot be done for it's own sake alone [void of course, of biblical reference] your "friend" would be silent. By this sentences end, all readers can think of wars, torture, murder, genocide and worse committed in the name of the Abrahamic god.

Simple humane secular values, are usurped by those unwilling to accept our fate, or let go their privileged life. Jesus' teaching's include:

Matthew 10:35-36
"For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law — a man's enemies will be the members of his own household."

Clearly, your "friend" lied or was firmly indoctrinated.

And it's the Christian god - not the notion of a deity, or our species evolutionary trait of seeking answers/understanding emotion [spirituality] - being sold here.

Why am I not surprised? Yet again, OLO gives voice to those conned and indoctrinated by false promises and grand illusions.

Firesnake:
Thanks for offering your point of view. I’ll try to respond to some of your more central questions.

< Why shirk other gospels? Why shirk Judas' gospel? Why not ask *questions* - demand evidence?>
My belief in God is not based on texts. Belief came from my inner experiences, such as those described in the article, and my relationships with other people and the ecosystem in which we live.

Evidence is for science, history and legal proceedings; it is irrelevant to my belief. The historical accuracy of the biblical narratives is often quite poor, and some accounts were obviously meant to be poetic or metaphorical rather than factual.

<Had you asked for one example that cannot be done for it's own sake alone [void of course, of biblical reference] your "friend" would be silent.>
If you have actually read my article with some care you will have noted that while not a member of a church, not accepting any religion and not accepting the notion of God I was “trying to promote different educational practices, new social and political directions, or more just and loving relationships.” I did so in the belief that these actions were worth doing for their own sake. Only much later did I come to understand that all along God (in one form or another) had impelled my actions.

The verse you quote from Matthew describes what often happens when an individual changes radically. If a person begins to be more authentic in a relationship, the other people involved feel challenged to follow the same path. They are often scared to do so, and this gives rise to defensive anger or flight.

< And it's the Christian god - not the notion of a deity, or our species evolutionary trait of seeking answers/understanding emotion [spirituality] - being sold here.>
God is not owned by Christianity, nor by any other religion. God is the urge to love the others unconditionally, an insistence in the collective unconscious of the human species. The challenge to the ego is to accept the insistence of God, who does not exist.

thanks..for the kind-words..[we-are-unique]

it/truelly is sad..how we can get so...far beyond..what the/reality is

if only people could comprehend...that the..so called/holy-books
are written..from a perspective...of spirit

that is not allways able-to..be adapted..
to matters of the flesh..[but often..can/be]

in/the flesh...we know..no-one..can take-away..our will
be/it..will to sin..will-to..comunicate..[or/not..comunicate]..etc

jesus...can..[could]..take our sin..on himself
[for he knows sin..isnt..the spiritual-reality/...
mainly because..no-one...judges..others..in/the heavens
[only..the-hells]

it truelly/is..a matter..of/not..casting the first-stone
[as we/all..lived/live..in glass-houses]...

till we..see/reason..to try to/do..better
its hard-to concieve any/reason..why to/even..try

take the/matter..[fact]..of gods/grace..
[which is truelly...allready/for-given..[by him]

yet those..hurt/injured...find..gods-giving..of/grace...
to..seem-to/make..their suffering..worse...[unregognised/disrespected/minimised]

and thus/find themselves..stuck-in//the poor-me...[hell]
and missing the big-picture..of moving-on[by forgive/forget]

to get grace..we must give-it...[
for none..[but/god]..is perfect

to demon-straight...we all/know...'the law's 10'
[actually its 12..and likely much-more..
[i found 16/once..without effort]

but lets/talk ..of the one..'thou shalt/not..murder'
[often..miss-read..as thou/shalt-not...kill]

see that even/a seed/lives...
just-to..take/our moring cerial/we-know..thousands of seeds needed to be killed..

[i think..thats/why..praying over-food..has importance]
[that..died..that we/may..live]

but its not/just..seeds...
[note the onion..and..why we/weep..as we kill it..to make a meal]..[the lessons..of the/onion..extend much-deeper..[of course]..

take its/many layers...these are/the..equivelent..
of our spiritual..[soul-bodies]..
levels of spiritual-evolution..through-which..we all must progress..to get/to the highest/level-heaven..

just-like..the layers/of..the humble/onion

in the next-life..we/are tied..
by our victim-hood..to/our oppressors
by the/very..deed/act..intent of that-oppresion]

[if we dont forgive;..them..their tress-pass...
as we expect/them..to forgive..us..our/tresspasses]...

we/remain..in that..'marrage'/
..the deeds..being..the fruit/offspring..created..
formed..in/the..flesh..[by/that-act]

we get grace/..by giving-it..
[so we..know..how much-pain..it costs/us..
to forgive.,.those who..made-us..victim..
[when its ourselves..who did/that..by not moving-on/forgiving/forgetting]..

but the/thing..is to/forget..

begin by forgiving-them..thier idiocy...
rather than spend..eternity..with them..
via-our/thought..in union..with them..
[obsession]..about..the same-things/events..]

[in the next/life..just thinking..on/a..given-thing/topic/subject
joins-us..to/that..we/are thinking-about..

as well as others..thinking..'it'/to]...

ie..the..'more..shall-be..'given'-promise/rule

turn-the/other cheek...
involves..seeing..a different-side/vieuw

but also trusting..god..
and turning-away..from..a fear

seeing..things/differently

Has it ever occurred to you that atheism is the healthiest development in any religion? It is merely the rejection of the current p[osotion adopted by those who claim to know God and feel they can speak on his/her behalf. What atheism is really saying is: " Not good enough. Work harder.Your ideas about who or what God is aint good enough. Keep looking."Atheism is a challenge to man.
Hopefully man will realise that onecan only experience God and never be able to contain the ineffable in a very limited and defective vessel called man.
socratease

Dear Crabsy,
interesting thoughts, and I'm impressed you've read both Arnold and Williams. I've been making a study of Williams's works in particular. I'm kind of a troubled leftie and would be interested to know your "point of view beyond the conservative-Marxist or right-left dimension that they represented"? Right and left are of course utterly relative; as you'd know, the ultra-conservative Edmund Burke was appalled at the idea of democracy--or modern bourgeois conservatism.
I've actually read more Jung than Freud, but I came to the conclusion on my own account that Jung was something of a romantic, which is what lends him appeal. My preference for Freud is akin to self-flagellation; as John Cleese once wryly intimated, there's nothing quite so bracing as a good thrashing!