Mediating disputes, both large and small, to a successful peace, requires the use of our most potent tool, language.  Its greatest strength is also a weakness.  Our lives and world are in a constant state of change and evolution.  The mutability of our language enables us to keep pace with this flux of events.  This mutability is also at the heart of our difficulty in clearly understanding each other as we work out our differences of opinion.  Two people can be speaking the same language and using the same words but still be talking right past each other.  The meaning of the words we use is dependent upon our experience with those words.  Our collective experience shares many of the same features but it is always the case that each individual’s experience with the words they use is unique.  Mediation of disputes in the religious world and between the secular/religious divide are particularly hampered by negative feelings and attributes concerning the words “God”, and “Religion.”  Their use in normal social discourse has become radioactive and quite often become an impediment to mutual understanding.  I like both of these words and have developed methods of using them that actually enhances understanding with my conversational partner without being viewed as threatening or dogmatic.

The word “God” has a its own set of problems that need to be addressed before I can successfully use them in ordinary conversation.  Besides being associated with attributes that are noncontroversial such as loving, compassionate, and universal fellowship, it is also associated with qualities such as infinite, absolute, and eternal.  If someone asks me what it means to be any of these concepts, the honest answer is : I really don’t know.  The crux of the matter is the big definition of this word is hazy and impossible to come to grips with.  The second issue with regard its meaning lies in the fact that  anyone who does not have an inner experience of the presence of the Divine necessarily acquires its meaning from outside their own experience.  They might rely on what they have read or conversations with people who do assert they have such an experience, or perhaps from observing the behavior of believers that ranges from the very best to the very worst, resulting in hate and violence.  These problems are substantial and the question becomes: How can I use this word to aid in mutual understanding rather than being a hindrance.

People with an inner experience of the presence of the Divine can use the description of their experience for what the word “God” means to them.  This method allows us to use “God” without arguing over what the “real” definition is.  More importantly it avoids the debate over the existence of a “being” that goes under the name of God.  In order to do this, the believer must understand what their experience is and even more importantly, be able to briefly describe it, using concepts that are understandable to their conversational partner.  The important words in the previous sentence being, briefly and understandable.  My description is: Everything is connected to everything, through an energy that is loving, conscious, and both personal as well as impersonal.  My conversational partner may well believe that no such energy exists or have any of the attributes that I use to describe it, that’s okay with me.  We all have different experiences.  Sharing my own personal definition of the word “God”, removes the threat of forcing a concept or belief down my partner’s throat. It allows space for them to share their own views on the subject matter.  We can find out about each other and how we see the world without the word,”God”, becoming a stumbling block. We don’t have to agree and indeed, this is a common occurrence in most areas of life.

The word “Religion” has taken a beating over the years and has a wide possible range of meaning to its users.  I have adopted the descriptive meaning of the word from “The Urantia Book” as a means to explore peoples beliefs and opinions without trying to change their opinion of the word and the meaning they ascribe to it.

There are three main areas of study humans use to investigate their reality.  Science is the study of the way things work and the discovery of facts that underlie universal laws or principles that explain the phenomena we see.  Philosophy is the study of the way we think and derive meaning from our experience using ideas, concepts, etc.  Religion is the study of the individuals inner unique experience of the presence of the Divine which leads to the recognition of universal values such love, compassion and fellowship.  This definition sets religion apart from the socially organized religious faiths that have an established theological doctrine that any outsider can study.  I am not making a value judgement as to the merits of religious faiths.  Both the individual experience and socially organized religious experience have their place in our world.  There are as many paths to the Divine or : There are as many ways to make one’s way through this world as there are people to walk them.

I make this distinction between Religion and particular faiths because there are specific faiths or groups within faiths that have become dogmatic in their doctrine and attempt to force their beliefs on members of their faith and even worse, on people who are not members of that faith.  The use of assertional truth that cannot be examined by using ones intellect or emotional experience and is promoted as true simply because it was written in a religious text or spoken by a religious leader is crushing to the human intellect and stops the process of advancement for our species.  Assertional truth is annoying at best and physically violent at its worst.  It is no wonder that the word, “Religion”, has come to be viewed so negatively in light of this behavior.

The study of the my own religious experience or in other words, being religious, in no way forces my belief on others or attempts to tell scientists what their results should be after conducting their experiments.  In short, there is no conflict between religion and science or philosophy for that matter.  Explaining this distinction makes it much easier to have a meaningful discussion about the world of Religion and enables us to advancement mutual understanding.

I propose that a big part of the solution lies in the pre-problem area of self identification.  The questions : Who am I? or Who are We? embodies the heart of the solution.  If we can realize a common identity, we can mediate our differences form a position of unity.  Currently, we are a disjointed patchwork quilt of identity with a large number of separated entities.  This commonly shared identity must withstand religious differences as well as crossing the line into the secular world to unite both into a whole.  There are many people who have no belief in God, don’t know, or don’t care if God exists at all. Every one must be included in this common identity if it is to work.

The answer is so obvious that we overlook it, or see it for a minute and then get distracted over and over again.  We are all human beings.  If you ask anyone who has even the most tenuous grasp of reality if they are a human being, they will say yes.  The phrase, “One People/One Planet”, aptly describes this concept.  I’m sure this is not headline news to you, but if it is so obvious, what stops us from achieving it?

The biggest generator of our illusory veils of separation is the misidentification of a characteristic or viewpoint for the person it describes.  It is born out of the way we use language to communicate our affiliation with a characteristic or viewpoint.  A political example would be, “I am a Republican.” A religious example would be, “I am a Christian”.  A nationalistic example would be,”I am an American”.  Using the phrase,”I am a blank”, leads to a conscious as well an unconscious confusion about our identity.  We are very creative and prolific in filling in that blank with words and ideas of all kinds.  When I say,”I am an American”, I don’t mean “I am a nationality.”  If we were to be clear, we would say: I am a human being that happens to have been born in the country known as America, and therefore my nationality is stated to be American.  Or we would say: I am a human being that finds the tenets of the Christian faith appealing and I walk the religious path of Christianity.  We can’t go around always prefacing our statements with,”I am a human being first…”, however, as people will look at us funny.  We can however, realize this common identity in our consciousness and take it with us, wherever we go and whatever we are doing.  This realization creates a living unity of identity that can grow and spread over the world.  There are no short cuts.  It must take root in the individual and pass among us with the allure of a smile from an innocent child.  I will use my own personal faith, as as example of how this concept works in both the religious and secular worlds.http://www.rationalfaith.net/

I chose the phrase,”Rational Faith”, partly in response to many conversations I have had with people at the “Socrates Cafe”.  It is an open to the public forum that discusses philosophical issues both big and small. Over the course of these discussions, I have had many intelligent and articulate people tell me they have no inner experience of the presence of the Divine.  They consider themselves to be atheist or agnostic with regard to the existence of God.  They quite often have either a conscious or unconscious assumption that belief in God is the result of taking a blind leap of faith.  The reasons for taking this leap are usually described in rather unflattering terms.  Examples would be, a believer is someone that is afraid of death and is looking for comfort, or a believer is someone that wants to be told what is right or wrong rather than making the necessary effort to determine such things for themselves, etc. When I explain that I have had and continue to have an ongoing experience of the presence of the Divine and as a result of this experience believe in God, the reasoning process becomes rational.  In fact, if I were to ignore this experience and deny the existence of God, it would be an irrational act.  This assertion is usually an attention grabber and is followed by a question or two. I am quite often asked what this experience is.  I describe it as “everything is connected to everything with an energy that is conscious, loving, as well as being personal and impersonal at the same time.”  They may not believe such an energy exists or has the qualities that I describe, but they can accept that I do have a genuine experience that I interpret, and that this interpretation leads to my belief and resulting faith.  One other question that sometimes pops up is : Why, if there is one God, is there such a variety of reactions and experiences as well as so many conflicting religious faiths and beliefs?  My response is that this is the nature of human experience.  If we take any issue or concept, such as justice, being a good parent, or love, and take a survey of humanities beliefs about them, we will find the responses to be all over the map.  The variety of answers does not, in and of themselves, either prove or disprove that justice, being a good parent, or love exists.

I acknowledge that their experience is as valid for them as mine is for me.  I do not argue over existence of God, as this is an exercise in futility.  Instead, I embrace our commonality of humanness, and that the scale of belief in God, ranging from atheist, to complete faith, is simply one of many  descriptive scales we can use to explore our personality and character as a unique human being.  This allows us to see each other as our sister or brother regardless of our belief in God.

As I share my experience with other religious people, we can acknowledge our differences while still realizing unity in our shared humanity.  An additional step is available to us in realizing we are all children of the Creator.  Our religious differences are simply part of the endless variety that God bestows on every child in His/Her unfolding.  Our differences may clash and be difficult to mediate but starting from Unity makes the process much easier to obtain harmony.  Even if we are unable to harmonize our disputes, and this holds true regardless of secular or religious disposition, we can walk away peaceably in the consciousness of, “We are all human beings, belonging to one family.”

Religionists examine the whole of their religious life using their intellect and experience in search of what is true, false, and simply unknown. If an idea or model is discovered to be false or highly unlikely, it should be let go and replaced with a search for something more accurate. This process is analogous to the scientific method. There is nothing to fear in admitting that we have misperceived or misunderstood a religious concept. It makes sense that as we mature, our depth in understanding God should deepen. If we hold on to religious concepts that we now understand fail the passage of time, we are likely to create trouble in the world. Religion needs religionists of all creeds and colors if it is to escape the bondage of dogma. Each individual regardless of their particular faith is responsible for their religious maturation resulting in increased capability to bring love into the world.

The flow of events through time that intersect with everyone of us is unique. We each have an opportunity to embrace these moments and learn from them. Regardless of what transpires after death, the reality of opportunity from moment to moment remains the same. I need only orient my consciousness to be open to them.

We have been given control of our bodies and the sanctity of that control is important. Who is to say when the baby acquires the right to life apart from the women’s control of her own body. I think our society has agreed that an abortion performed on a baby one day from being born is a violation of the right to life. It becomes more difficult to know as we move further and further away from the birth, whether or not a “human being” exists.

The gift of life from the creator is always something to be treasured. The ideal of every pregnancy being a desired one is something for us to strive for. Until that time, there will be difficult choices to be made by individuals and the societies they live in. I suspect that in the fullness of time our spiritual consciousness and our knowledge of biology will progress to the point where differences can be reconciled and harmony can be achieved.

I see no rational reason to conclude homosexuality is unnatural or sinful. Treating each other with love and respect, regardless of the genders involved, is the key in creating a loving relationship.

The war between science and religious doctrine dissolves in the view of rational faith. Scientific discovery of the way the universe works is welcomed as a tool to be used by the rational mind to make life better for our brothers and sisters. Direct personal experience of God has nothing to fear from the rational scientific exploration of reality.

Direct personal experience is the key to belief in God without making a leap. I was around seven years old when I began to get the sense or feeling that everything in the world was connected. This connection was composed of an intelligent energy. My awareness and experience of this force has stayed with me throughout my life and is the basis of my belief in God.

I do not claim any special ability to perceive this connection. This experience is hardly unique to me, it has been and currently is experienced by people all over the world. I will in no way try to prove that what I experience is real. It is enough that it is real for me. If you experience God, I’m sure that your experience is just as real for you.

My purpose in these essays is to show how a person’s direct personal awareness of God, in combination with their rational mind, can navigate the world without the use of religious doctrine. I define religious doctrine as truth that is beyond analysis and simply asserted to be true because God has revealed it through a religious text or prophet.

The experiential belief in God as the Creator and Sustainer of all things means I am a small part in a connected whole. My sense of self now expands to everything I experience. I still retain my self identity and uniqueness, but it no longer makes sense to see my self as  separate from anyone or anything. Living in this awareness means that action upon the world in any way is to act upon my self. I prefer to be helped than harmed and this preference becomes the filter through which I view my actions in the world. The tricky part in being successful is to maintain my awareness of God’s connection as I go through the trials and tribulations of life. I desire to improve and see no reason why I cannot continue to improve upon my ability to maintain conscious awareness of my connection to everyone I meet. The road of spiritual self interest is open to all who desire to travel it.