Jim Palmer's Blog, page 7

Announcing the Goodbye Merry-Go-Round Cohort

Maybe last week you decided you can't do God, church, religion or Christianity anymore. Perhaps you walked away months or years ago and been spinning your wheels in I-hate-religion mode, but now even that is getting old. Or maybe you have explored every feasible combination of ideas about God, renamed "God" something else, temporarily became Buddhist, studied ever philosophical and spiritual path known to humankind, and ... now you just...like...want...wish...you could jump off the merry-go-round of "figuring it out"and have a simple, meaningful, inspiring, bullshit-free life, and something like inner-serenity and peace; a sense of harmony, humanity, authenticity, purpose and congruence; relationships of depth and significance; and doing something with your life that you feel really matters. You can create this life for yourself! I promise. It won't be a cakewalk, but you can do this. If I did, you can. Since 2009 I have watched people riding the merry-go-round of replacing one belief for another, following one guru after another, trading in some "ism" for another, becoming a devotee of some new enlightened teaching after another, adopting a new spiritual practice after another... round and round and round they go. I've not only watched this occur in people's lives but for the past eight years I have listened, supported, encouraged and guided them in my spiritual direction practice. In many cases, people seek me out because they are knee-deep in the volatile and messy process of shedding religion. Some of the common areas we work through are: making peace with your past; undoing religious pathology; navigating existential angst; starting over with a different relationship with yourself; learning new mindsets and tools for creating a life you want; and exploring the depths of what it means to be human. I know this journey well, having walked this path myself many years ago. In a nutshell I've learned that if a person is serious about doing their personal and inner work, taking the actions that come from that, and has a support crew behind them... they can create that life mentioned above. Otherwise, round and round and round they go, where it stops nobody knows. This summer I'm leading a 8-week cohort. I'm calling it the: Goodbye Merry-Go-Round Cohort Group. This cohort group is not for the faint of heart. I'm inviting eight people who are tired of the religious/spirituality/self-help flavor-of-the-month approach to life and living, and interested in serious self-searching, deep growth and transformation work. There's no book to read, no teachings to hear, no belief-system to follow, no guru to worship... just you and me and eight people getting real about our lives. I will facilitate this 8-week journey for our group. I will partner with each person individually on this journey, and cohort members will actively participate in the process with one another. The 8-week experience includes: 1. Cohort prep work, which includes the creation of intentions for each participant2. 8 weekly one-on-one Skype calls with myself 3. 2 group calls 4. Pairing up cohort partners for real and authentic friendship and sharing  5. Dedicated private Facebook page for further interaction, discussion and sharing 6. Creating a 1-year intention for each participant and monthly "checking-in" calls with myself and cohort partner for support and encouragement Expect to spend 3-5 hours a week in this 8-week process. The cost of the 8-week cohort group is $425 per person. I am willing to work with folks on some sort of payment schedule. I may also have some scholarship funds available. The cohort group will be closed once the eight participants are selected.Jim's Summer Cohort is Now Fullto receive information and updates for the next one

Announcing the Goodbye Merry-Go-Round Cohort Group

Maybe last week you decided youcan't do God, church, religion or Christianity anymore. Perhaps you walked away months or years ago and beenspinning your wheelsin I-hate-religion mode, but now even that is getting old. Or maybe you haveexplored every feasible combinationof ideas about God, renamed "God" something else, temporarily became Buddhist, studied ever philosophical and spiritual path known to humankind, and ... now you just...like...want...wish...you could jump off the merry-go-round of "figuring it out"and havea simple, meaningful, inspiring, bullshit-free life, and something like inner-serenity and peace; a sense of harmony, humanity, authenticity, purpose and congruence; relationships of depth and significance; and doing something with your life that you feel really matters. You can create this life for yourself! I promise. It won't be a cakewalk, but you can do this. If I did, you can. Since 2009 I have watched people ridingthe merry-go-roundof replacing one belief for another, following one guru after another, trading in some "ism" for another, becoming a devotee of some new enlightened teaching after another, adopting a new spiritual practice after another... round and round and round they go. I've not only watched this occur in people's lives but for the past eight years I have listened, supported, encouraged and guided them in my spiritual direction practice. In many cases, people seek me out because they are knee-deep inthe volatile and messy process of shedding religion. Some of the common areas we work through are: making peace with your past; undoing religious pathology; navigating existential angst; starting over with a different relationship with yourself; learning new mindsets and tools for creating a life you want; and exploring the depths of what it means to be human. I know this journey well, having walked this path myself many years ago. In a nutshell I've learned thatif a person is serious about doing their personal and inner work, taking the actions that come from that, and has a support crew behind them... they can create that life mentioned above. Otherwise, round and round and round they go, where it stops nobody knows. This summer I'm leading a 8-week cohort group.I'm calling it the: Goodbye Merry-Go-Round Cohort Group. This cohort group is not for the faint of heart. I'm inviting eight people who are tired of the religious/spirituality/self-help flavor-of-the-month approach to life and living, and interested in serious self-searching, deep growth and transformation work. There's no book to read, no teachings to hear, no belief-system to follow, no guru to worship... just you and me and eight people getting real about our lives. I will facilitate this 8-week journey for our group.I will partner with each person individuallyon this journey, and cohort members will actively participate in the process with one another. The 8-week experience includes: 1. Cohort prep work, which includes the creation of intentions for each participant2. 8 weekly one-on-one Skype calls with myself 3. 2 group calls4. Pairing up cohort partners for real and authentic friendship and sharing 5. Dedicated private Facebook page for further interaction, discussion and sharing6. Creating a 1-year intention for each participant and monthly "checking-in" calls with myself and cohort partner for support and encouragement Expect to spend3-5 hours a weekin this 8-week process. The cost of the 8-week cohort group is $425 per person. I am willing to work with folks on some sort of payment schedule. I may also have some scholarship funds available. If you are interested in exploring the possibility of this cohort group, send me a personal message or email (nobody.jimpalmer@gmail.com). The cohort group will beclosed once the eight participants are selected.

I'm for being human

I'm involved in theHumanist Association of Middle Tennessee, and last night I attended theNashville Humanist Meetup group, of which I am a co-organizer. There is a definition and many explanations and descriptions about what "humanism" is but what won me over was the root word - "human." In my view, we could use a lot more humanity in our world. More specifically, a caring, courageous, compassionate, authentic, impassioned, responsible, resolute humanity that seeks to build a world of peace, justice, harmony and workability for all.It is my conviction that despite all our differences as human beings, there is a set of values that deep down we all share in common and form the basis for building a world that works for everyone. Lately I've beenpersonally involved in the "interfaith" movement, making this case. In a nutshell, it's my view that:Every person can fully embrace and follow their religious tradition, spiritual interests, or philosophical views without creating division, destruction, hostility, or hatred. ​Every person can find a rationale and motivation within their religious tradition, spiritual interests, or philosophical views to be an instrument of goodness, peace, love, and compassion in the world, and affirm the inherent, equal, and unconditional worth of every human being.​Every person has the right to follow their own inner guidance in choosing their own religious, spiritual, or philosophical views and practices. ​Every person can participate in a process of personal growth, self-actualization, and fulfillment of one’s highest beliefs and aspirations, and encourage the same for others. ​Every person benefits when each of us follows our own unique inspiration for building a world that works for everyone.Along the way I've discovered that "interfaith" isn't the greatest term because if we truly want to build a complete and inclusive human solidarity toward a common good then we need to expand the conversation to include people of no religious faith at all such as my atheist and humanist brethren. I explore this possibility in more detail in my post:Can "Interfaith" Include Atheists?I don't think there's a good reason for any of us to be divided against each other. Thinking about the humanist meeting last night, there's a significant tradition of Christian humanism, which emphasizes the humanity of Jesus and his social teachings. Jesus had a vision for society, and if you dig into it you find things like economic fairness and justice, and duty to the disadvantaged, unfortunate, vulnerable and oppressed. I recently wrote apostabout the social teachings of Jesus that have universal significance, whatever your religious, spiritual or philosophical tradition or beliefs.Speaking of "humanism," here are a few of the central principles:Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism and other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.Humanism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over acceptance of dogma or superstition.Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance that affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives.The lifestance of Humanism—guided by reason, inspired by compassion, and informed by experience—encourages us to live life well and fully.I'm good with that.A couple books I've recently read that explores humanistic values from some different perspectives are:Christianity without God by Lloyd GeeringBeyond Religion by Dalai LamaI believe in the human race. I believe there can be unity in diversity. I believe what Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools." I believe we can do this.Over the past several weeks I've made friends with people who are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Baha'i, Atheist, Humanist, and many others. I flung my heart open to all of them. I found many shared beliefs and values for collaborating together to build a world of love, compassion, peace, harmony, well-being and workability for the entire human family. I'm choosing not to allow the extremists in each of these traditions and belief-systems to prevent what the majority of us know is true deep inside our hearts. We are one human family. What makes us one is never threatened, unshakable and able to assimilate whatever other ways we are different. I'm going to beat this drum until my last breath on this earth.Last night in the Nashville Humanist Meetup group we had a discussion about what people would like to see happen in our regular group meetings. One guy in the meeting, who I had never heard say much before, spoke from his heart and shared his hopes that our meetings would be a safe space where people could just be real... you know... like human - openly, honestly, authentically, vulnerably human.We all want that, don't we? To share our story, to tell our truth, to be heard, to be ourselves - the whole beautiful mess of it all... to put it all out there without edits or filters or photoshop... and discover in the presence and understanding and acceptance and validation of others that it's okay for each of us to be our kind of human.I was once a pastor at the largest Christian church in North America. I was considered a theological scholar based on my academic degrees. And yet, I had a nagging and persistent restlessness in my soul. I was missing something, and I didn’t know what it was. This inner angst caused me to leave my professional ministerial life, on a personal quest to find that missing piece.It was an unlikely path that proved instrumental in discovering the answer I had been searching for. I found it amongst a group of humanists. I referred to this as an “unlikely path” because humanists typically don’t hold a belief in God, which didn’t quite line up with my Theist and Christian background and training.But these humanists – they had me with their root word – “human.” All my life I had been searching for truth in the heavens above and in the sacred writings of religion, but suddenly I found a profound truth that was simply present in my heart… in my humanity… it was the truth of being human, and all that that meant.I am not a "humanist." I am not a "Christian."I am a human.I think that's a broad enough label to cover us all.

A Muslim, Christian, Jew and Atheist sat down together

Lately I've become more involved in"interfaith dialogue"and efforts in my city of Nashville. Last week I spoke at the interfaithWalk for Valuesevent on the subject of "truth" from the perspective ofhumanism. I've written several blog posts of late, exploring why religious, spiritual and philosophical differences divide us and how we can overcome it.Scapegoating ReligionIs "religion" a dirty word?Can "interfaith" include atheists?Why Jesus matters, regardless of your beliefs16 characteristics of fake religion I'm the organizer of theNashville Interfaith Meetup Group. Last night we met at theIslamic Center of Nashville. Imam Ossama Bahloul and President Rashed Fakhruddin hosted our group for an interfaith discussion.Here are five things that made last night's gathering especially profound for me:Hearing an Egyptian Muslim and Egyptian Christian speak to each other in Arabic.Imam Ossama expressing his sadness and frustration overIslamophobiaand how people judge the 1400-year old religion of Islam by the hatred and violence of the 5-year old extremist group, Isis.That moment when a Muslim man referred to an Atheist woman as his "sister," and agreeing to disagree on the subject of the existence of God while affirming their unbreakable human bond and oneness.When a Christian stood up and expressed gratitude to Ossama, Rashed and the Islamic Center of Nashville for being the first ones to show up and offer assistance when their church was destroyed by fire.When a Jewish woman shared that her father was worried that she was in danger by visiting the Islamic Center of Nashville, and the resulting conversation of how we can be instruments of peace in this world by correcting false views and encouraging friendship and dialogue among people of religious and cultural differences.In my view, one's religious, spiritual or philosophical beliefs do not have to divide us as human beings or diminish our common bond as one human family. The following five beliefs are a good start to changing our global discourse, sentiments, and actions about the power of religious, spiritual, and philosophical diversity for good:1. Every person can fully embrace and follow their religious tradition, spiritual interests, or philosophical views without creating division, destruction, hostility, or hatred. ​2. Every person can find a rationale and motivation within their religious tradition, spiritual interests, or philosophical views to be an instrument of goodness, peace, love, and compassion in the world, and affirm the inherent, equal, and unconditional worth of every human being.​3. Every person has the right to follow their own inner guidance in choosing their own religious, spiritual, or philosophical views and practices.4. ​Every person can participate in a process of personal growth, self-actualization, and fulfillment of one’s highest beliefs and aspirations, and encourage the same for others. ​5. Every person benefits when each of us follows our own unique inspiration for building a world that works for everyone.I had coffee with a Baha'i friend who shared with me a central principle of the Baha'i faith, which is that we are all created to carry forward an ever-advancing civilization, and that the unification of the human race is central to this endeavor. To the Baha'i, this doesn't mean we dilute or eliminate our cultural and religious distinctions and differences, but that we embrace unity in diversity."Consider the flowers of a garden. Though differing in kind, color, form and shape, yet, inasmuch as they are refreshed by the waters of one spring, revived by the breath of one wind, invigorated by the rays of one sun, this diversity increaseth their charm and addeth unto their beauty." - Bahá’u’lláhIn my own study and discussions with Imam Ossama, I learned that the fundamental philosophy of Islam rings on universal humanity. Islam always encourages its followers to live with tolerance, harmony, love, brotherhood and peace on the earth, adding that humanity is more precious than any of the religions. Islam teaches that all humanity is a single body. This also means that all humankind is a family - brother and sisters, equal before God. Islam teaches us to harmonize our relations and adhere to the principle of peaceful co-existence of all human beings irrespective of their faiths, religions, and ideologies.If you're interested in exploring practical ways that you can encourage more interfaith understanding, tolerance, unity and acceptance, including countering rising hostility toward Muslims,give this a read.I feel a great gratitude in my heart for my new friend Imam Ossama Bahloul, and I call him my brother. I would stand beside him in difficulty, defend him as the good, peace-loving and honorable human being that I know him to be, and come to the aid of he and his family in time of need. I trust him implicitly. I feel a little more hope for our world knowing he's in it.

Can "interfaith" include atheists?

Atheism is disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. There are many reasons why people become atheists. From my professional experience of working with people who have been damaged through their association with toxic religion, some of them become atheists because of their religious trauma. It’s no secret that any person who feels harmed, betrayed or oppressed by their religion is likely to become its biggest critic, and possibly become atheist. That’s not to say that atheism is always or even typically a response to negative religious experiences. I know many atheists who have genuinely concluded based on intellectual or scientific grounds that there is no evidence to warrant belief in God or deities.On a side note, many people who experience a crisis of faith or question their beliefs, deconstruct their long unquestioned notions about God and can no longer in good conscious subscribe to them. Non-belief in the “God” of one’s religious conditioning is not necessarily a complete rejection of the divine. There are many people who come to reject the notion of a theistic or personal God, but adopt an alternative view about a higher, ultimate, or transcendent reality. I myself am an atheist in the sense that I divested my belief in the “God” I had previously construed through religion. I no longer believe in the “God” I learned in church – a God of separation, judgment, and condemnation, a God who sends people to Hell, a God who is a grand puppet-master over human affairs, blessing one person and cursing another. I no longer believe in ‘that’ “God.”Jesus himselfdid not subscribe to such a notion of God. An Atheist would find quite a bit incommon with Jesus– they both reject religion’s idea of God.According to theresearch done by Pew Research Center,the share of Americans who identify as atheists has roughly doubled in the past several years. Globally,the world’s newest major religion is no religion. Already in many countries throughout the world,atheists outnumber believers. Even the Pope recently said thatbeing an atheist is far better than being a bad Christian.I hold a belief that our common humanity is reason enough for all people to coexist peacefully, and operate with justice, equity and compassion in our human relations. I believe in a human solidarity where we all cooperate and collaborate together to alleviate human and planetary suffering, and where we address the systemic causes of such suffering and build a world that works for everyone. Whatever one’s religious, spiritual, secular or philosophical views may be, they don’t have to be an obstacle to or weaken constructive human solidarity.I am a catalyst for interfaith dialogue and action. In my view, whenever religion divides or pits people against one another, it rejects and defies its own true and authentic identity.Religion is often the scapegoatfor the problems of our world, and the way somepeople talk about religiononly adds fuel to the fire. I believe that the “interfaith” circle needs to be expanded to include atheists. Perhaps an “interbelief” (or "intergorup") mentality, which is inclusive of all people, including those who believe that science and not religion best explains the nature of reality, or who believe there is no sound evidence or reason to support the notion of god or gods.Interfaith dialogue and action is vital for achieving a peaceful and workable world. But as the context of our times shifts with atheists steadily rising in number, the pressing question may not be whether Jews, Christians and Muslims can get along and work together, but can the religious and non-religious, believers and non-believers reach across their differences to embrace their common humanity and work together toward a common good. In other words, can religious folk and atheists get along and work together?Being honest, the proposition on the surface doesn’t seem promising. I’m not sure which is worse, the way religious people demonize atheists, or the way atheists demonize religious people. I’m typically the guy who calls out and confronts the religious when they are doing stupid things, being divisive and destructive, rationalizing any behavior that doesn’t line up with the Golden Rule, or violate the spirit of compassion and love. But neither does it help nurture harmony, cooperation and good will when atheists call religion a mental illness and religious people, idiots.Too many religious people havefalse ideas about atheists and atheism. It’s my personal belief that atheism makes a critical contribution to humankind’s conversation about what is profoundly significant and meaningful about the universe and our lives as human beings. I recent read a brilliant book by biologist E. O. Wilson,The Meaning of Human Existence, in which Wilson explores answers to life’s greatest existential questions, based on science. I was recently a guest on a talk-radio show and the topic I chose to discuss was“what religious people can learn from atheists.”I recently read the“10 Non-Commandments of Atheism,”which are:1. Be open-minded and be willing to alter your beliefs with new evidence.2. Strive to understand what is most likely to be true, not to believe what you wish to be true.3. The scientific method is the most reliable way of understanding the natural world.4. Every person has the right to control of their body.5. God is not necessary to be a good person or to live a full and meaningful life.6. Be mindful of the consequences of all your actions and recognize that you must take responsibility for them.7. Treat others as you would want them to treat you, and can reasonably expect them to want to be treated. Think about their perspective.8. We have the responsibility to consider others, including future generations.9. There is no one right way to live.10. Leave the world a better place than you found it.But I have also learned that there are militants, fanatics, and fundamentalists in virtually all religions, belief-systems and philosophies, including atheism. However, it would be unfair, as it would be with religion, to judge or stereotype the many based on a few. People like French philosopher Andre Comte-Sponville provide hope. He writes, “I appreciate people who practice respectful dialogue and honors differences, and doesn't demand a "right" vs "wrong" context. My intention is not to convert people to atheism. It is merely to explain my position and the arguments in its favour, motivated more by love of philosophy than by the hatred of religion. There are free spirits on both sides, and it is to them that my words are addressed. The others, whether believers or atheists, can be left to their certainties.”On the question of whether Christians and atheists can work together, the Religious News Service ranan interesting piecethat is an interview with Harvard’s Chris Stedman, who is an interfaith activist but atheist, and author of the book,Faitheist: How an Atheist Found Common Ground with the Religious.I believe if all human beings, religious and atheist alike, would adopt the following five beliefs that there is no limit to the good we could do in this world… together.Five beliefs to change our global discourse, sentiments, and actions about the power of religious, spiritual, and philosophical diversity for good.1. Every person can fully embrace and follow their religious tradition, spiritual interests, or philosophical views without creating division, destruction, hostility, or hatred. ​2. Every person can find a rationale and motivation within their religious tradition, spiritual interests, or philosophical views to be an instrument of goodness, peace, love, and compassion in the world, and affirm the inherent, equal, and unconditional worth of every human being.​3. Every person has the right to follow their own inner guidance in choosing their own religious, spiritual, or philosophical views and practices. ​4. Every person can participate in a process of personal growth, self-actualization, and fulfillment of one’s highest beliefs and aspirations, and encourage the same for others. ​5. Every person benefits when each of us follows our own unique inspiration for building a world that works for everyone.Whatever one believes about God, we are all 100% human. According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, we all roughly want the same things: the necessities for safety, security and survival; the need for belonging, esteem, love and relationship; to reach our full individual and collective potential. We all suffer loss, have our fears, encounter suffering and endure difficulties. Religion is not going away, neither is atheism. And whether we like or not, we all are in this together. Or as Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “We must learn to live together as brothers and sisters or perish as fools.”

I carry Buddha and Jesus in my heart

The Buddha's moment of enlightenment under the Bodhi tree was the realization that nothing fundamentally needed to change in order to know peace, serenity and freedom. In other words, there is nothing wrong with the way things truly are at its most real/fundamental level, and therefore there is nothing truly/factually/objectively preventing peace, serenity and freedom. Furthermore, the Buddha saw that people are the cause of their own inner suffering or psychic pain, which ultimately results in the hurt we inflict upon one another and destruction we cause in the world.The  four noble truths were laid out by the Buddha as a remedy or solution to this self-caused suffering. This suffering, the Buddha said, is a result of our ignorance of the way things truly are and our attachments and expectations of an impermanent word. The Buddha said that all the greed, violence, injustice, hatred, etc of the world is a byproduct of our ignorance and attachments.The Buddha spoke of feeling a great compassion for all the suffering of the world. In the Buddhist tradition, Bodhisattvas are those who choose to continue living sentient lives in order to aid the liberation of others. So while the central insight of the Buddha was that nothing at the most fundamental level needed to change, he still held the desire for the liberation of all beings and the elimination of all suffering, and to end the kind of ignorance and attachments that result in the broken relationships we have with each other as human beings and all living things.Buddha's profound insight was that all is well and whole at the most fundamental level and that his underlying nature/essence was one with that wholeness. The Buddha also observed that on the surface of life there is continuous change and that inner suffering results from our attachments to those temporal realities. We seek a permanent happiness through our attachments to things of impermanence, which leads to suffering. The Buddha taught that one can find deep joy and peace in this life as a byproduct of our intuitive awareness or tacit understanding of the way things really are at the deepest level. He taught that this awareness allows us to walk through life, being fully present each moment with joy, love, compassion, peace, courage and wisdom. This is only possible by neither resisting or clinging to whatever might unfold along your path. You respond to each situation as it requires but no more than that. Of course there is normal human pain both physically, emotionally and mentally in this world, but the Buddha taught that the deep inner anguish and suffering that plagues so many people's lives can be prevented through our awareness of the way things really are and the absence of resistance and attachment.This does not mean that we accept what we see in the world without action to change it. Many situations and circumstances in life rightfully evoke the desire to bring change. Much of the misery and suffering of this world is the result of the ignorance of the way things really are. Rather than tapping into the deep peace and joy of the fundamental reality of all things which is never disturbed or threatened, we instead attempt to achieve happiness, well-being, and peace through our worldly attachments. We fight and claw to attain and hold onto that which by its very nature is impermanent and fading away. Should you think that you are a failure because you cannot seem to walk through this world with this deep awareness or the absence of resistance and clinging, the Buddha said you must first and foremost learn to have patience and compassion upon yourself, and to take your struggle as a part of your own path of growth.Jesus would not have disagreed with any of these insights, but expressed them in different ways and focused on different things, namely the lie of separation between God and humankind, which Jesus believed was at the root of the kind of suffering and ignorance that Buddha spoke of.Jesus never caused anyone to be saved and the Buddha never caused anyone to be enlightened. They both said they had a solution to a problem and the problem was suffering. They both said this suffering stemmed from false perception or spiritual ignorance. In the case of Jesus, he struck down the false notion of separation from God. He insisted, "I am the truth." What truth was that? God and humankind as one. There is a divine source and life and love that permeates all, and we are not separate from it. The Buddha addressed a similar issue, namely the false perception that people are separated from joy, peace and well-being. He taught that these realities could not be reached or achieved in the external world outside ourselves. Both Jesus and the Buddha said that the kingdom of heaven and nirvana are found within. Neither Jesus nor the Buddha taught that this truth makes one indifferent toward the world. In fact, once one connects with true peace, joy and well-being inside and finds that kingdom or nirvana within, they can give themselves fully to the world in love and compassion without resistance or clinging.Jesus was right - there is no separation between God and humankind.Buddha was right - there is suffering and we can liberate ourselves from it.Jesus was put to death at a very early age. He was crucified as a criminal. The Buddha in later years became frail and fell ill near a remote village near the border of Nepal, and died. Statements made by Jesus and the Buddha before their deaths indicated that they did not want to leave the world behind - a world they had loved so much. Both Jesus and the Buddha told their followers to use even their deaths as an occasion for awakening. They did not deny or gloss over the sorrow, grief and sadness that was felt. All along both Jesus and the Buddha demonstrated that there was both sorrow and joy on the journey, and that the underlying truth never swayed. Knowing their deaths were near, each reminded their followers of the task at hand to live by the same spirit and to walk in truth.Jesus wept and the Buddha was brokenhearted by the suffering of the world. This is where we start. We look out and we see it, we feel it deeply. We weep. Our hearts are broken. We care.I feel a great love for the Buddha. How he entered the suffering of the world and his discoveries about it. When I ponder his moment of enlightenment under the Bodhi Tree I feel a peace in my own heart. I am grateful to have Jesus as a brother. I see his revolutionary spirit and relentless love, and how he demonstrated the human and divine together as one. Oh Buddha, oh Jesus - I carry you both in my heart.Jesus said, "I am the truth." The Buddha said, "He who sees me sees the teaching and he who sees the teaching sees me.” It is not necessary to build a religion around Jesus or Buddha. Embrace the truth they demonstrated and bore witness to. Do not build a religion around Jesus or the Buddha. Jesus said there will come a time when you will no longer see me. The Buddha said if you meet Buddha on the street, kill him. In other words, there is no Jesus or Buddha except the Jesus and the Buddha that is inside you and that you yourself are. You must walk this journey now yourself. You must say "I am the truth" and "He who sees me sees the teaching." Do you understand? The path is within you. The path is you. You must walk it. You must be that path.

Why I speak of Jesus (Why I don't call myself a "Christian")

I am often asked why I continue to speak about Jesus, given the fact that I left professional Christian ministry and much of my Christian theology with it.If you have followed my journey through my five books, you know that since 2006 I’ve been sharing my story out of organized religion and particularly Christianity. My first book was,Divine Nobodies: Shedding Religion to Find God (and the unlikely people who help you). This was my "coming out" book - coming out of organized religion and leaving it behind in search of a more authentic and non-religious spirituality. My follow-up book,Wide Open Spaces: Beyond Paint-by-Number Christianity, was a book that described my process of deconstructing my entire Christian belief system and how my beliefs and life changed as a result.The third book I wrote was:Being Jesus in Nashville: Finding the Courage to Live Your Life (whoever and wherever you are). This book tells the story of how I came to answer the question of the significance of Jesus for my life. The answer stirred up a lot of controversy. I was labeled a heretic and my Christian publisher refused to publish the book and cancelled my writing contract.My next book was,Notes from (Over) the Edge: Unmasking the Truth to End Your Suffering. In this book I chronicle my discoveries and experiences in addressing the root cause of my own inner suffering. It shares a distinctly different way from my traditional Christian background that I had come to understand myself, life and the divine. My most recently published book,Inner Anarchy: Dethroning God and Jesus to Save Ourselves and the World, is my re-framing of the Jesus story, which is a departure from how traditional Christianity understands and interprets Jesus - his message, significance and relevance. There are two groups of people who are likely to be bothered by this book: those who have fixed Christian beliefs about Jesus, and those who have written him off.These last several years I have deconstructed, dismantled and discarded much of my Christian belief system, which is an interesting path for a guy who has a Master of Divinity degree and spent many years preaching the traditional Christian message. Yet in all of this, my interest in Jesus has deepened and expanded. What I now understand to be the message of Jesus' life and teachings holds a place of great significance in my life. However, speaking of Jesus as I do is not a popular endeavor.On the one hand there are those who have “shed religion” and shed Jesus with it. For many of these folks, the mention of Jesus reminds them of everything that was wrong and damaging about their particular Christian belief-system and church involvement. There are also those who have never been Christians themselves but negative experiences with those who are turned them off to all things Jesus. Many atheists and agnostics don’t really see any point in giving a lot of credence to Jesus. After all, there’s not a very kind historical record of what has often happened in his name. The Crusades of the Middle Ages come to mind. Westboro Baptist church is another. There is no shortage of examples of how Christian religious fundamentalism has done great harm in our world.All of this hubbub over someone who some say never even lived and whose existence is just a myth.  So there’s definitely an anti-Jesus or feeling of indifference toward Jesus that is prevalent. There are many contemporary spiritual teachers who say we need to forget about Jesus, and adopt more progressive and enlightened understandings.Then on the other hand, the typical person who holds a strong belief in Jesus, namely Christians, aren’t too fond of me talking about Jesus either. This is because what I say about Jesus doesn’t support the beliefs, mindsets and orthodoxy of traditional Christianity. As mentioned, I ran into this pretty early in my writing career when my Christian publishing house sent me packing. My most recent bookInner Anarchysent some Christian folk through the roof. I received emails from Christians who condemned me to hell, called down God’s wrath upon my head, and likened me to David Koresh and Jim Jones.So, talking about Jesus these days is a dangerous thing to do for lots of different reasons. So why do I continue?There are a lot of people for whom their rejection of or ambivalence toward Jesus is because the Jesus they were exposed to was filtered through one stripe or another of the Christian religion. It’s unfortunate because what often passes as "Christianity" doesn't do Jesus any favors, and in my view does not accurately represent his life and message. The Christian religion has madeJesus’ truth and teachings exclusive. According to this mindset, one has to “become a Christian” and “accept only Jesus” in order to have the truth. So either you belong to the Christian club, or you’re out of luck, doomed, and destined for Hell. This view is unfortunate. The truth Jesus bore witness to and demonstrated hasuniversal significanceand it doesn’t require one to become a Christian. Jesus never intended for himself or his teaching to become a religion. Instead, Jesus confronted the problem of the typical religious mindset, and lifted up truth that any person can embrace if they are willing to look inside themselves.Contrary to what some might assume,Jesus did not start the Christian religion.If Jesus were alive today I believe he would be appalled by much of what has been created in his name. If Jesus lived and taught the way he did 2,000 years ago, some Christian folk would be the first ones to crucify him. Jesus was not a religious person, and vehemently opposed religion and the way it separated people from God, and divided them against each other. Once speaking to a group of religious leaders, Jesus called their “God” an impostor, a liar, and a murderer—even the Devil!The Christian religion does not own Jesus, and until a person digs a little deeper than just what they might have been told about him in church, they are likely to miss what I believe are the most significant parts of who Jesus was.People often ask me if I am still a "Christian"?It's not an easy question to answer.My own understanding of Jesus over the years has evolved.Regardless of one’s religious faith there is little doubt among contemporary historians that Jesus was a real person who lived in Palestine in the First Century. Historians agree that Jesus was an itinerant teacher who traveled and taught throughout Palestine gathering followers around him through the force of his personality and the compelling nature of his message.  There is general agreement that Jesus was perceived by the Roman occupiers of Palestine as a dangerous religious radical and a disturber of the peace. It didn’t help that Jesus infuriated the religious establishment for refusing to legitimize it. Consequently, he was arrested by the local authorities and summarily executed by the Romans in a public crucifixion, the standard method used by the Romans to deal with political troublemakers.There is near unanimity among scholars that Jesus existed historically, although biblical scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the Gospels. There are countless resources that delve into the matter of the historicity of Jesus. Here are a few I’ve read:The Classical World: An Epic History from Homerto Hadrian by Robin Lane FoxDid Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazarethby Bart D. EhrmanJesus and the Politics of his Dayby E. Bammel and C. F. D. MouleThe Historical Jesus in Contextedited by Amy-Jill LevineBeyond Beliefby Elaine PagelsJesus: An Historian’s Review of the Gospelsby Michael GrantZealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazarethby Reza AslanOver the years, all kinds of non-Christian spiritual writers have vouched for Jesus. A couple interesting perspectives on the topic are:An atheist defense of the historicity of JesusandThe irreligious assault on the historicity of Jesus.I think one of the challenges in sorting all this out is how the Christian religion has added quite a few extracurricular ideas and teachings about Jesus that aren’t historically verifiable. I’ve been sharing these ideas for years now, which includes the15 Things Jesus Didn’t Say post.Jesus has a message and I believe it’s worth considering.In fact I believe he bore witness to and demonstrated a truth that has the power to save ourselves and a world that is careening down a path of planetary doom. In my view, as a reaction against the absurdities of the worst of the Christian religion, people want to write off Jesus entirely.There are people who have found Jesus to be significant outside the box of the Christian religion. For example, there is a very robust tradition of “Christian humanism,” emphasizing the humanity of Jesus, his social teachings and belief in universal human dignity, and his propensity to synthesize human spirituality and the material world. There has also been a “Christian anarchist” movement, most notably championed by Leo Tolstoy, who claims that anarchism is inherent in the life and teaching of Jesus. Jesus is far more radical than many would have you believe, and for good reason – it threatens the status quo and all religious and cultural institutions of authority and power.Jesus’ primary message was what he referred to as the “Kingdom of God” or the “Kingdom of Heaven.” When people questioned Jesus about when this Kingdom would arrive, Jesus said it already had and was within them. Jesus taught that this “Kingdom” was an innate sense of goodness, justice, beauty, harmony and solidarity inside us. You don’t have to be a religious scholar or enlightened guru to access it. Jesus said instead you have to become like a child and be willing to trust and follow what you know in your innermost self is true. It's uncomplicated but it's difficult. It takes courage to confront and oppose the status quo. It takes courage to be human the way Jesus was.What Jesus was saying to his generation was that the Kingdom of God was not a future political kingdom to anticipate but rather a present reality to the degree that his message was heard and acted upon by those who "had ears to hear." His teaching was not to anticipate a future kingdom but rather to bring about the Kingdom of God in the present through one’s actions and commitments, and lifting those deep feelings up out of us and into the world. That “heavenly dimension” within us is the source of the power, authority, love, freedom and togetherness that can transform our current human situation.I wroteInner Anarchybecause I believe that reconsidering Jesus and the truth he bore witness to and demonstrated can birth a new world. That truth is not a religious truth or contingent upon any religious ideology – it is universally significant and accessible to any and every human being. It’s the Christian religion that shortchanged the world by making it all about Jesus the person rather than Jesus the message. Jesus died but his truth is still alive in each and every one of us, waiting to be born and brought out into our world if we have the courage to embrace it. There are 2.5+ billion Christians on our planet. I sometimes wonder how different our world would be if we stopped worshiping Jesus and started trusting and following what we all know is true and real deep inside us that Jesus told us to listen to. For me, that message is worth sharing… even with the hate mails I receive daily.The Christian church is fond of telling the “sinners” of the world that they need to “accept Jesus,” but it seems to me that it's the Christians who need to. They are the “unbelievers” who turned Jesus into a religion and failed to embrace his truth. Accepting the truth that Jesus bore witness to and demonstrated will make you a heretic like he was. That’s the kind of inner anarchy we need now.Jesus might well be the world's most famous missing person. What Jesus was and what was made of him are two different realities. Once you clear away the spin and hype, you discover a lot of remarkable things about Jesus. Jesus died as a political provocateur and disturber of the alliance of convenience between the Roman occupiers and the corrupt Jewish leaders. The Romans did not waste crucifixion on nobodies. Jesus was a somebody. It wasn't a surprise that Jesus was killed, only that he was not killed sooner.Jesus' rhetoric and way of life was a threat to the occupiers and the priestly caste that benefited from it. Jesus spoke of a different kingdom and stirred the hopes of the people. Hope is the energy of revolution. Hope and excitement can disturb the pseudo-peace on which tyranny depends. The truth that Jesus shared and demonstrated debunked the foundational premises on which those religious and political systems were built.Jesus called for people to stop listening to them and start listening to the spirit of truth within themselves. He attacked the credibility of those systems and told people to find their authority inside themselves. Each time Jesus opened his mouth, he was pulling out another wooden Jenga block, making these religious and worldly powers vulnerable and unstable. Jesus himself was no threat—he had no position of religious or political power and wasn’t campaigning to be the worldly president—but his truth made him a one-man wrecking crew.Jesus is the world's most famous missing person because the religion that bears his name worship him as God, and have mostly lost who he was as a human.Despite having had a Master of Divinity degree and serving many years as the Senior Pastor of a church, I had not truly grasped the full significance of Jesus. Once you untangle the mess the Christian religion made of Jesus, you see that the hope Jesus represented is not a god or heaven up in the sky, but is within each of us. We are the people we've been waiting for.I've been accused of coming down quite hard on my Christian brethren, but it's only because I believe we (including myself) can do better in how we represent Jesus and live his truth in the world. I am pointing the finger at myself because of the years I mishandled the life and message of Jesus. It's not my intent to claim that all Christians and all quarters of the Christian religion or Church are making a mess of things. I know of many Christ-followers, churches and Christian leaders who are making an extraordinary impact in this world. These days, rather than label myself a "Christian," I try to be more descriptive of why Jesus matters to me and why I believe he matters for our world.

Is "religion" a dirty word? (and is that missing the point?)

You might say that thefive booksI have published appeal particularly to people who feel betrayed or shortchanged by organized religion, particularly the Christian religion. Many individuals who become disillusioned and lose faith in their religious beliefs or feel victimized through their religious involvement, abandon all belief in God and become intolerant of all religion.My path has been different. Though I questioned my own religious beliefs, leaving many of them behind, I did not abandon my spiritual interests altogether. Instead, the process of deconstructing my Christian religious tradition and belief-system led to a deeper and more expansive and inclusive spirituality. In my earliest books I share the particulars of my journey as a theological scholar and church pastor who left my professional ministerial life to pursue a more authentic spirituality. My subsequent books have offered readers a “non-religious” way of understanding God, and an alternative view of the significance and relevance of Jesus.There are many paths a person may take after they’ve divorced themselves from their religious tradition or belief system. One path often taken is antireligionism, which is opposition to all religions.Antireligionism is not new and may have had its beginnings during the French Enlightenment with self-confessed atheists such as Baron d'Holbach who viewed all religion as an impediment to the moral advancement of humanity. Christopher Hitchens may be one of the leading antireligionists of the 20th century. Other notable antireligionists include Karl Marx, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, John Dewey and Bertrand Russell. Antireligionists see very little or no value in the notions and practices of religion, and some even categorize religion as a form of mental illness.It’s understandable why a person who was damaged by their religious involvement would actively oppose religion altogether. In this context, “religion” is a dirty word that represents abuse, oppression, fear, shame, control, exploitation and corruption. The destructive impact of toxic religion in many people’s lives should not be taken lightly. In my spiritual direction practice I have worked with countless people who have been deeply damaged by their involvement in religion. In the mental health field, this has come to be referred to as Religious Trauma Syndrome (RTS).We can all agree that abuse, oppression, fear, shame, control, exploitation and corruption are abhorrent wherever they are present, especially in religion. However, it took many years for me to realize that my own personal experience of religion is not emblematic of all religion or people’s experiences of religion. Just as you could make the case that religion has been at the root of much hatred, greed, ugliness, discord, destruction and violence in our world, one could also make the equal assertion that religion has motivated the greatest acts and movements of love, service, compassion, solidarity, justice, charity and beauty. For all those who claim that religion has been an obstacle to progress, there are others who assert that religion has made it possible. Simply put, the answer to the question of whether religion does more harm than good or more good than harm, depends entirely upon who you ask.It’s not uncommon for a person who leaves organized religion to become an atheist, and settle upon some form of humanism. But it should be said that not all atheists are antireligionists. There are people who do not hold a belief in God for various reasons but respectfully accept others who do. Many atheists are against the misuse of religion but not against religion categorically. While condemning religious fundamentalists and fanatics (as we all should), they leave room for people to practice their religion in meaningful but peaceful ways.A kinder and gentler option to antireligionism, is the “spiritual but not religious (SBNR)” movement.  SBNRs takes issue with organized religion as the sole or most valuable means of furthering spiritual growth. Mostly dissenters from institutional religion, the “spiritual but not religious” crowd feel a tension between their personal spirituality and membership in a conventional religious organization. Many people use the word “spirituality” to refer to their interior life of faith and “religion” to mean the necessary communal and/or organizational part. Many go as far to view organized religion as the major enemy of authentic spirituality, claiming that spirituality is private reflection and private experience – not public ritual.  In contrast to religion, spirituality is associated with the interior life of the individual. Most SBNRs value curiosity, intellectual freedom, interspirituality, and an experimental approach to religion.On my Facebook page I asked the question: Is there a fundamental difference between “religion” and “spirituality,” and if so, what is it? Overwhelmingly, people had a negative view of “religion” and a favorable view of “spirituality.” Here is a sampling:“Religion = rules, one size fits all, productSpirituality = feelings, individual, process”“Spirituality is freedom, out of the box and authenticity. Religion is laws, in the box and inauthenticity.”“Religion is institutional and legalistic.Spirituality is personal and experiential.”“Religion is an outward commitment to an organisation but spirituality is a relationship with God”“Religion is needing something outside of one’s self to be whole. Spirituality is realizing the depths of wholeness that already dwells within oneself.”“Religion = making rules for self & others to follow out of fear of punishment.Spirituality = discovering love in self and others that unites us all and is more than a "sum of the parts;" embraces and connects all of creation.”“Spirituality is a personal relationship with the Divine. Religion is crowd control.”“Religion focuses on Dogma.Spirituality focuses on Experience”“Religion is following a set of rules or ideas already established by someone else or a group based on their understanding of old writings. Spirituality is the inner search in one's soul in for our connection and oneness with the divine.”This kind of distinction between “religious” and “spiritual” has become prominent, particularly in modern Western culture. It has been uniquely advanced in Christian circles with the popular phrase, “Christianity is not a religion but a relationship.” The growing assumption is that whatever could be called “religious” can’t be “spiritual.” Historically, the words “religious” and “spiritual” have been used synonymously. For example, American philosopher and psychologist William James defined “religious experience” as “feelings, acts and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider the divine.” This description would certainly fit as “spiritual but not religious” as long as the word “religious” wasn’t attached to it.In my own writing and conversation I have changed the way I talk about “religion,” which mostly involves using a qualifier. My first published book is titled:Divine Nobodies: Shedding Religion to Find God (and the unlikely people who help you). Since that book I have used the phrase “shedding religion” countless times. What I actually meant by the word “religion” needed a qualifier, but qualifiers don’t make for great book titles. In my mind, “shedding religion” meant shedding toxic, legalistic, fundamentalist, fear/shame/performance-based, judgmental, condemning, repressive, controlling beliefs, practices and relationships of one’s religious affiliation, namely within Christianity.Using the word “religion” without a qualifier is unfair because, as I learned, my experience of religion wasn’t representative of all religion or all people’s experiences of religion. In the Bible, James defines “pure religion” as caring for the victimized, defenseless, vulnerable and homeless. In the sub-title of Divine Nobodies, I certainly did not mean: “Shedding compassion, care and help for those in need to find God.” It is also the case that antireligionists, atheists and SBNRs would affirm the value of coming to the aid of the victimized, defenseless, vulnerable and homeless.James qualifies the word “religion” with the word “pure.” This may be an important distinction so far as what is often passed off as “religion” is contrary to its own original values. For example, in my view there are many instances where Christianity resembles very little of the example and teachings of Jesus. This is why I wrote the post,16 Characteristics of Fake Religion. I could be accused of imposing my own ideals on religion. This is a fair criticism. I do believe what Harry Emerson Fosdick wrote, “Nothing in human life, least of all in religion, is ever right until it is beautiful.”After writing my first book,Divine Nobodies, my Inbox was flooded with emails from people who were disenchanted, disillusioned and sometimes embittered with their Christian faith and church. I noticed a pattern in which some people became vehemently against religion and assumed an anti-religion identity. In many cases, it appeared that people were getting stuck in that place and never progressing past it – their new religion was being against religion. This motivated me to continue exploring and writing because I knew it was necessary to live and share an alternative. For me,Jesuswas helpful in the process as one who both criticized and confronted what was corrupt and harmful about his religious tradition of Judaism, but also affirmed and upheld what was good and right about it.Scapegoating "religion"for the problems of our world seems hollow.For myself, I’m finding it’s important to clarify what exactly I’m against and what I’m for. To say I’m either for or against “religion” doesn’t cut it. I am against the misuse of religion whenever it causes abuse, hatred, division, oppression, fear, shame, repression, exploitation, greed, injustice and corruption. I am for religion when it promotes love, peace, wholeness, compassion, solidarity, goodness, service, justice, harmony, beauty and charity. In my view, there’s nothing more “spiritual” than that.

Galileo's Daughter: Can Science and Religion Get Along?

The volatile relationship between spirituality and science through history is uniquely captured in the relationship between Galileo and his daughter, Virginia. This is a subject explored in great detail in Dava Sobel’s book, Galileo's Daughter: A Historical Memoir of Science, Faith, and Love. It is based on the surviving letters of Galileo Galilei's daughter, the nun Suor Maria Celeste, and explores the relationship between Galileo and his daughter. There are 124 extant letters written by Virginia to her father, composed between 1623-33. Maria Popova has anexcellent articleabout Sobel’s book, and the relationship between Galileo and his daughter on her brainpickings.org blog.The bookwill not disappoint any person interested in understanding Galileo’s place in history. It was nominated for the 2000 Pulitzer Prize for Biography. The Galileo Project also has aninteresting pieceabout Virginia, and the status of women in Galileo’s time.Galileo Galilei was an Italian polymath: astronomer, physicist, engineer, philosopher and mathematician. He played a major role in the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century. In 1633 Galileo – nearly seventy years old and in faltering health—was summoned by Pope Urban VIII to face the Inquisition in Rome. He was charged with heresy for his continued insistence that the earth rotated around the sun. Under pressure from the Inquisition, Galileo eventually recanted his belief and was sentenced to house arrest where he lived out the final nine years of his life.The dispute between the Church and Galileo has long stood as one of history's great emblems of conflict between reason and dogma, science and faith.  Interestingly though, Galileo was no secular scientist battling a backward Church. Rather, Galileo was a committed Catholic whose scientific discoveries in support of Copernicus’ heliocentric cosmology put him at odds with the prevailing Aristotelian geocentric view. Galileo had both supporters and opponents among his Catholic brethren. His official condemnation was a result of the Church leadership interpreting Scripture to support their scientific views. It is a sad and complicated tale, clouded by politics, money, prestige and wounded pride.Centuries later, Pope John Paul II would point to Galileo as the chief culprit in what he called the “tragic mutual incomprehension” between science and religion, “Galileo's run-in with the Church involved a tragic mutual incomprehension in which both sides were at fault. It was a conflict that ought never to have occurred, because faith and science, properly understood, can never be at odds.”In her brainpickings.org piece, Maria Popova writes, “The most palpable mystery, of course, is that of how Galileo was able to reconcile his scientific devotion to critical thinking with his daughter’s unquestioning faith, and how Virginia was able to reconcile her religious devotion with her father’s continual flirtation with heresy. Sobel argues that Galileo and Virginia themselves made sense of this perplexity through a categorically different orientation of mind and spirit — rather than seeing it as a paradox, much less a contradiction, they were able to make loving room for a simultaneity of devotions, both between and within themselves.”Why was Galileo and Virginia able to navigate and accept their differences peacefully and lovingly, but this kind of conciliatory spirit could not be found between Galileo and the Church?In Galileo’s time, the prevailing scientific view among Christians and non-Christians alike was that the earth did not move and that the sun rotated around the earth. Most Christians interpreted the Bible to support this view. When scientific evidence challenged their interpretation of Scripture, many clung stubbornly to it, insisting that it must be trusted over observation.During this period, personal interpretation of Scripture was a sensitive subject. In the early 1600s, the Church had just been through the Reformation experience, and one of the chief quarrels with Protestants was over individual interpretation of the Bible.Theologians were not prepared to entertain the heliocentric theory based on a layman’s interpretation. Yet Galileo insisted on moving the debate into a theological realm. There is little question that if Galileo had kept the discussion within the accepted boundaries of astronomy (i.e., predicting planetary motions) and had not claimed physical truth for the heliocentric theory, the issue would not have escalated to the point it did. After all, he had not proved the new theory beyond reasonable doubt.Rather than turn this into a “he said, she said” matter between Galileo and the Church, I’d like to suggest some useful ways that science and religion might act as allies and not adversaries. I believe that the relationship between Galileo offers some hints in respect to this.For science and religion to operate as allies there must be mutual respect. This begins with an acknowledgement that both science and religion are valid fields for exploring and understanding the nature of reality. Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. Religion is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes a set of beliefs and practices, meant to facilitate human interest in exploring spiritual, scared or transcendent reality.The academic study of religion, which is often called religious studies, is a relatively new field that aims to treat all religious traditions even-handedly. Utilizing the tools from many other academic fields (including philosophy, history, sociology, anthropology, psychology, and theology itself), the academic study of religion arises out of a broad curiosity about the nature of religion and religious traditions.Mutual respect between science and religion means that science affirms the validity of religion and the study of religion, and religion affirms the validity of science and the study of science.The respecting of boundaries is another necessary ingredient in fostering a positive relationship between science and religion. In a nutshell, this is the recognition that science can’t do what religion does and religion can’t do what science does. Science is not religion. Religion is not science. When either one tries to do the other, it typically doesn’t go well. This is not to say there aren’t ways that science and religion crossover or even enhance one another’s understanding, but the aims of each are fundamentally different. The aim of science is not to explore or understand non-material or non-physical reality. The aim of religion is not to provide an empirically-based understanding of the physical universe.Respecting boundaries is not an easy proposition to maintain, mainly because science too often asserts that it knows and can explain everything, and religion too often refuses to allow science to inform and even change its understanding of the universe.Both science and religion need to confront their tribe’s fanatics. When those in the field of science speak of religion as mental illness, or when those in the field of religion accuse scientists of being atheist militants, all goodwill is lost. Yes it’s true, some people’s religious beliefs and sentiments are destructive, and some people who hold these kinds of beliefs are psychologically unstable and unhealthy. And it’s also true that some people in the field of science are fanatical atheist militants, and have their own psychological maladies. Once you acknowledge the fanatics on both sides, you basically are left with all the other people in the fields of science and religion who may understand the world differently and even have a clashing cosmology, but rather than being stuck in “tragic mutual incomprehension” can foster a space of invigorating mutual rapport. After all, there are many people in the sciences who are religious, and many religious people who are scientists, including Galileo.But even if science and religion can play nicely together based on these dynamics, the real answer for the harmony between science and religion may be more a matter of what we find in Galileo’s relationship with his daughter, Virginia.It seems obvious from Galileo and Virginia that the relationship and bond of father-daughter trumped their differences as scientist-nun. It’s a bit dicey to draw a universal application from this. Is it really possible to replicate that kind of loving and affectionate familial bond between people in the fields of science and religion? In other words, is PhD atheist neuroscientist, Sam Harris, going to feel this deep loving bond with PhD Christian physicist, Ian Hutchinson, to create sentiments of mutual respect and acceptance? Can they, as Popova described with Galileo and his daughter, “make loving room for a simultaneity of devotions, both between and within themselves”? Can science and religion find in its heart a love for one another like this?It’s hard to say. A fair answer would be, probably not. Even though the highest religion notions of love such as Mahayana Buddhism’s objectless compassion and Christianity’s love for one’s enemy, encourage a universal and indiscriminate love among all people, it’s safe to say that religious people themselves have failed miserably at upholding this lofty notions of love and brotherhood.There is a universal principle that seems to be indisputable by scientists and theologians, which is the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule or law of reciprocity is the principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated. This could possibly be a way forward for science and religion to coexist peacefully and productively. But neither is this an easy path to follow because it would require some measure of humility, the constraint of ego and pride.It seems to me that both science and religion must conclude that there is a benefit for them proceeding as friends rather than enemies. I see no downside to proceeding as friends, and see very little positive coming from proceeding as enemies.Maria Popova also has a useful piece on her site,Carl Sagan on Science and Spirituality.   Sagan wrote, “The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.”My suggestion for reconciling whatever bad-feelings, offenses and discord that exist between science and religion is to make a greater attempt to understand each another. Calling for a deep bond of love that would trump all enmity seems a bit unrealistic. Let's all hope this happens. However in the meantime, it might be useful to start the process of greater understanding and acceptance with those with whom we already have a significant bond, which could include family members, neighbors and people we know personally in our communities, or colleagues and peers we respect who hold different views than our own.Let’s start there.

Let's Talk Post: Is there life after death?

(Each Wednesday I answer a question submitted through the"Let's Talk" page.)“Jim, I’m not sure any more about what happens when we die.  Do you still believe in life after death?”I really enjoy these easy and simple questions!First off let me say the obvious – the question of life after death is not something I can adequately cover in a short blog post. This and other existential questions often become distressing for those who find themselves questioning and doubting the explanations and answers given through their religious tradition or belief-system. It often results inan existential crisis, which is that moment when an individual questions the very foundations of their life: whether this life has any meaning, purpose, or value. It can cause a frightening uncertainty about life’s biggest questions, and a sense of disorientation, confusion, or dread in the face of an apparently meaningless or absurd world.An existential crisis is often provoked by a significant event in a person's life – trauma, major loss, a life-threatening experience, loss of one’s faith. Sometimes it’s this kind of existential crisis that causes one to seek me out forspiritual direction. These are not matters that are sorted out quickly, and requires quite a bit of personal work.Human beings want answers to life’s biggest questions, which include: Where did we come from? Why are we here? What is the meaning and purpose of life and our existence? Is there a God? What is death and what happens when we die?A person’s sense of security in the world is typically tied to their particular religion, belief-system or philosophybecause it supplies answers to all the important questions about life and existence. This is one reason why the shedding religion process can be volatile – it’s unsettling to lose that security and certainty. Somehow someway we want that security and certainty back, perhaps with different answers, but back nonetheless.Here are a few considerations, when it comes to the question of life after death.The afterlife or life after death is the concept of a realm, or the realm itself (whether physical or transcendental), in which an essential part of an individual's identity or consciousness continues to exist after the death of the body. According to various ideas about the afterlife, the essential aspect of the individual that lives on after death may be some partial element, or the entire soul or spirit. Belief in an afterlife stands in contrast to the belief in no-existence after death.From a strictly scientific point of view, the only correct answer to the question of life after death is that we don't know. Science is limited to concepts that can be either supported by evidence or that can be disproved. There is no solid evidence for life after death, nor can the existence of life after death be disproved. So real, objective science has no answer to this question. If there is life after death, it involves a soul of some kind. (We know exactly what happens to our bodies when we die.) Similarly, there is no evidence for the existence of a soul, and the existence of a soul has also never been disproved. Until someone figures out a way to gather evidence to support the idea of life after death, or until someone figures out a way to prove that there is no such thing, science cannot supply a definitive answer.Answers to existential questions cannot be proven by empirical evidence, which is evidence or results that can be observed or confirmed by our senses. If it is raining outside, you can “prove” it is raining because there is empirical evidence – you can see, hear, smell, touch and taste the rain.In terms of this kind of empirical evidence, you would have to actually die yourself to know with absolute certainty for yourself what happens at death and if there is life after death. But even this is assuming that if there was life after death that it would be a continuation of some form of individual consciousness so you could know it. For example, if life after death involved shedding one’s individualized identity or self and returning to the wholeness of the universe, there might not be a basis for “knowing” anything as you know things now. In other words, there might be some form of life after death but you would not be consciously aware of it.So the short answer to the question of what happens when we die and life after death is that you can’t know for sure… at least not the kind of sure that comes from the proof of empirical evidence. Even though there are those who claim to have passed to the “other side” and returned to tell about it, it still cannot prove the claim for you unless you yourself have this experience. You can choose to take their word for it and there’s nothing necessarily wrong with considering that as evidence for life after death, but it would not be the kind of direct empirical proof (observation, direct experience, sensory validation) that science typically depends upon to determine the veracity of something.That’s not to say that there aren’t reasonable justifications for the idea of life after death.There are many thoughtful explanations that people feel support the likelihood of life after death.People find such reasoning from diverse sources, including science. But that’s different from saying that it can be proven and known with certainty. This is why some people fear death even though they hold a belief in life after death – because there’s always that question of how you can really know with absolute certainty.There are different answers to the question of life after death. A few of the explanations include:Nothing.Nothing happens when you die. You have this life only; when it’s over, that’s it.Return to Source.Each person returns to the wholeness of the universe.Embodied Spirits.We are embodied spirits, having both a physical and spiritual dimension. At death, the body dies but the spiritual dimension or consciousness continues to exist.Universalism.Everyone in the end will be “saved.”Reincarnation.Living beings are seen as having an endless series of lives achieved through a continual process of reincarnation into which all are locked until they can be freed through enlightenment.Eternal Life and Eternal Judgment.Eternal life as eternal spiritual bliss (Heaven). Eternal life as a new heavens and new earth. Judgement as annihilation. Judgement as eternal conscious torment (Hell).I could continue on with further explanations, different views, and even tell you what my own current personal beliefs are about life after death, but it seems it would be most useful to touch on the matter of how to address or deal with existential questions as a whole.Consider the possibility that you don’t have to orient your life around existential questions and having answers of certainty.Who says you need answers to these questions to live a deeply meaningful, fulfilling and whole life? Consider these two options: Option #1: There is life after death; Option #2: There isn’t. In what way(s) would your current life be different, depending upon which of these options you decide upon? Rather than tormenting yourself with questions about the afterlife, which can’t be answered with certainty, why not become more interested in the herelife and all the possibilities that this life offers now.Instead of angst about life after death, what about a renewed vigor for life before death.As J.R.R. Tolkien, “All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.” Mark Twain wrote, “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” And Jim Morrison, “No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.”This involves creatinga different relationship to life itself.It’s shifting away from seeing life as: a conundrum to be figured out; a threat to overcome; a problem needing to be solved. Instead, one can decide upon any number of other possibilities of understanding life: a gift to be embraced; a mystery to enjoy without fear; a pilgrimage of personal growth; an invitation to actualize oneself as fully as possible; an opportunity to know and experience a communion beyond the boundaries of the individual self; directing your life in accordance with a meaning and purpose that aligns with your innermost self; becoming, embodying and being what you believe to be the greatest truth, such as love; finding meaning in the moment and what's right in front of you, and responding in grace as each situation of life requires.I discuss these possibilities in more detail in my onlineLife After Religion course, and help people develop the mindsets and tools necessary to approach life in this way.Questions of the afterlife can be a byproduct of a basic terror of death, which some people have. I recently read a book that you might find useful:Staring at the Sun: Overcoming the Fear of Deathby Irvin D. Yalom.