“God” and “Religion”: Getting Through the Sticky Wicket

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.