LSP44: Forgiveness in the Parable of the Prodigal Son

The Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15: 11-32) is one of a series of parables Jesus wrote to teach others about forgiveness.

The main divergence between Jesus' theology and the theology of other religious groups in first century Palestine was Jesus' understanding of the mystical power of forgiveness. Jesus' understanding of forgiveness is the key that unlocks the meaning of the Kingdom teachings, including the parables.

The Prodigal Son (or . . . Redemption Doesn't Happen Overnight). Photo credit JAT 2015.

Jesus' teachings on matters other than forgiveness don't sound a whole lot different from the teachings of other groups. Jesus, like the Pharisees -- and, indeed, like most religious groups of the time -- believed in the importance of ethics, moral choices, and obedience to a code of moral conduct. No society works well if there aren't shared assumptions about "the right way to create Peace." So Jesus certainly didn't invent the idea of moral codes. What he did do was turn the pathways to Peace upside down.

During Jesus' lifetime, and for centuries before, a body of writing called Wisdom literature was used to gather together important maxims about living a moral life. Wisdom literature taught that obedience to divinely revealed laws and cultural norms would guarantee "happiness" and eventual acceptance into the heavens. A major characteristic of most Wisdom literature is the insistence that Materialist laws of cause-and-effect govern all Creation (including God's own choices). If you apply reason, justice, and piety to these laws, you can create stability, order, safety, and happiness in your society. But those who wilfully disobeyed God's laws will surely be punished -- and rightly so. In the Jewish Scriptures, the books known as Proverbs and Ecclesiastes are considered examples of Jewish Wisdom texts.   

But another canonical Jewish book that's often labelled "Wisdom" takes a different tack. The Book of Job is so different from conventional Wisdom collections that biblical scholar Michael Coogan once described the Book of Job as "anti-Wisdom Wisdom." In Job, nothing goes right for the key character until he decides to listen not to wise religious scholars but to what God says about God. It turns out that what God tells Job is not what human leaders have been teaching their followers.

Jesus, like Job before him, is a teacher of anti-Wisdom Wisdom. His minority understanding of how to be in relationship with God is so radical that it's only recently we've begun to want this paradigm in our society.

Jesus and Job both present a pathway to Peace built on seven main spiritual attributes:

1. forgiveness -- NOT mercy, atonement, or contract law
2. agape/love -- NOT obedience, fear, or contract law 
3. a "thinking" faith -- NOT blind faith, prophecy, or revelation 
4. humbleness -- NOT religious humility, religious salvation, or status addiction
5. radical inclusiveness -- NOT clan chosenness, honour-shame cultural norms, or sectarian segregation
6. courage -- NOT fate, predestination, or abdication
7. trust in the One God Who Is Two -- a belief that God is not a lone male figure (YHWH) but two distinct and separate figures, one male and one female (YHWH and his Asherah?), who together are the One God and who make all decisions together based on mutual forgiveness, agape, thinking faith, humbleness, radical inclusiveness, and courage. As above, so below.

The Parable of the Prodigal Son reflects Jesus' theology, Jesus' understanding of how we can be in full relationship with God during our lives as human beings.

Then Jesus said, "There was a man who had two sons. The younger of them said to his father, 'Father, give me the share of the property that will belong to me.' So he divided his property between them. A few days later the younger son gathered all he had and travelled to a distant country, and there he squandered his property in dissolute living. When he had spent everything, a severe famine took place throughout that country, and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed the pigs. He would gladly have filled himself with the pods that the pigs were eating; and no one gave him anything. But when he came to himself he said, 'How many of my father's hired hands have bread enough and to spare, and here I am dying of hunger! I will get up and go to my father, and I will say to him, "Father I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired hands." So he set off and went to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion; he ran and put his arms around him and kissed him. Then the son said to him, 'Father I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.' But the father said to his slaves, 'Quickly, bring out a robe -- the best one -- and put it on him; put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. And get the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and celebrate; for this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found!' And they began to celebrate.

"Now his elder son was in the field; and when he came and approached the house, he heard music and dancing. He called one of the slaves and asked what was going on. He replied, 'Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fatted calf, because he has got him back safe and sound.' Then he became angry and refused to go in. His father came out and began to plead with him. But he answered his father, 'Listen! For all these years I have been working like a slave for you, and I have never disobeyed your command; yet you have never given me even a young goat so that I might celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours came back, who has devoured your property with prostitutes, you killed the fatted calf for him!' Then the father said to him, 'Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours. But we had to celebrate and rejoice, because this brother of yours was dead and has come to life; he was lost and has been found.'"

There's nothing in this Kingdom parable that resembles traditional Wisdom. Instead, what we see is forgiveness. Forgiveness defies accepted logic and contradicts the "eye for an eye" laws of justice that governed most first century societies. This, suggests Jesus, is what God is really saying to us about who God is -- a parent who allows human children to become "dead" to their own true selves and struggle to learn from their terrible mistakes before the lost ones can be reunited in love and courage with their divine family. It's the children who have lost themselves, yet find their way home through self-forgiveness and courage, who have entered Jesus' Kingdom of the Heavens.

Jesus' Kingdom parables are confusing, messy, non-linear, multi-layered, and filled with anti-Wisdom Wisdom because life is confusing, messy, non-linear, multi-layered, and filled with all sorts of irrational (but totally wonderful) emotions like love and gratitude and devotion and forgiveness and the courage to change.

The Apostle Paul didn't agree with any of this, but that's another story.

LSP43: Intuition: Learning to See With Your Ears

This morning I was excited to read an article in the current issue of Discover (July/August 2015) that gives a good analogy for what I do as a cataphatic mystic and how I learned to do it. The article is called "Sonic Vision" by Berit Brogaard and Kristian Marlow, and it's excerpted from an upcoming book called The Superhuman Mind: Free the Genius in Your Brain. If you have a subscription to Discover, you can read the article online. Or you can buy the current issue at the newsstand, as I did.

First, though, a quick story that sort of shows how I navigate in my life as a mystic and auditory channeller  (Some of you may recall that I have a strong auditory connection to the soul who once lived as Jesus son of Joseph. Again, I understand this is problematic for some readers and, again, I can't apologize for who I am and what I do.)

To find the Discover article about humans who are blind but have learned to "see" their environment by using sophisticated echolocation skills, I could have kept checking on the Discover website until such an article appeared. But that's not how I live my life. There's only so much time and so much money and so much brain energy. What I do instead of constantly checking websites or subscribing to print magazines is to patiently wait until I get a message from my angels. (Again, I understand this is problematic for some readers, but this is a Christian site, and angels or messengers or persons-of-soul or whatever you want to call them have always been part of the Christian narrative.)

So here's how my discovery of the Discovery article went. First, I realized I needed to go buy a birthday card for a friend. Then it occurred to me I could walk to the plaza instead of driving (though often I drive). And because I walked to the plaza, I passed by the window of a convenience store I hadn't gone into for a long time. And because I walked past the window, I saw their sign for inexpensive cards. (I'm on a tight budget, so I'm always looking for good value). And because I saw the sign, I went in. And because I went in, I discovered the store has been turned into a good magazine shop with titles that don't normally show up in the local drugstore. And because there was a good selection of science magazines, I was able to "feel" the quantum Post-It note that was attached to the Discover issue. 

Don't laugh, but this is how I do all my shopping. It's a process of navigation. It's a process of following quantum threads until they lead me to the quantum Post-It attached to the thing I need. Often the Post-It is attached to something I'd forgotten I needed, but while I'm standing there, with my hand reaching out unerringly toward the shelf, my mind (often the slowest part of me to catch on in these situations) suddenly says, "Oh, yeah, I actually need that!"

At which point I know I've been guided by my incredibly kind and incredibly thoughtful angels.

So anyway  . . . back to the article about echolocation in Discovery. If you have a chance to read it, you'll discover an amazing story about a man named Daniel Kish who lost his sight to retinoblastomas at the age of 13 months and then figured out on his own how to use echolocation to "see with his ears." What's really fascinating (apart from Kish's skill, dedication, and willingness to teach others how to see with their ears!) is that he and others with this skill use the visual processing area in the brain's occipital lobes to generate spatial imagery in their minds. They suss out echoes that most of us can't hear (because we haven't practised hard enough) and these echoes are processed not in the auditory centres of the brain, but in the visual cortex (which does process some sounds). Using comparative informative (between the sounds going out from their clicking tongues and the reflected sounds coming back from nearby objects), the brains of these individuals can construct highly detailed images of what's nearby. It takes proper training and lots of practice and commitment, but it can be done. Sighted people can learn how to echolocate, too, although the phenomenological experience may be different.

The process described in this article is very similar to what I do and how I do it. I don't click with my tongue, of course, but I seem to be able to "click" with an as-yet-to-be-determined type of brainwave. I get "quantum echoes" coming back from nearby persons-of-soul, and these are the echoes my brain processes and turns into words and imagery.

I've known since December 2004, when I had my brain scanned on three different days at the Amen Clinic in California, that the visual cortex of my brain lights up when I'm talking to Jesus, but my auditory cortex isn't really involved in the channelling process. I've also learned after 15 years of daily experience as a cataphatic mystic that when I'm awake and channelling, I don't really "see," yet I get black-and-white visual imagery with words that come in from persons-of-soul, including Jesus. The words always come in clear as a bell -- the same as having a conversation with somebody who's in the room or on the phone with me.

SPECT scan of my brain when I'm talking with Jesus (December 2004). White areas show which brain regions are working hardest (highest oxygen uptake), red areas show the next highest oxygen uptake, and blue areas show average regions that are working but not doing the "heaviest lifting" for the task that's being captured on the scan. SPECT scans capture the brain's function during specific tasks rather than showing simple anatomy. On my channelling scan, some of the high-activity areas are in the cerebellum (which is normal for most people). Other high-activity areas (white and red) are in the thalamus; basal ganglia; posterior cingulate; and the visual cortex at the back of my occipital lobe.

This is a voluntary and learned process -- just as echolocation is a voluntary and learned process. It's also a scientific process. And I had to be trained how to do it properly, just as Kish's students have to be trained. In a few people (such as Kish) it develops instinctively. But most people have to be trained.

Being a cataphatic mystic is a bit different from being a non-sighted person who's learning to echolocate. The process is more complex, and not many people are born with the talent to be full-fledged cataphatic mystics (which is as it should be -- the world only needs a few full-fledged mystics at any given time).

But everybody is born with the brain-talent for intuition (a talent which, on rare occasions, such as during an intense emotional crisis, gets pushed more towards the mystical end of the spectrum, with actual sensory impressions coming through briefly from Spirit). And everybody can learn how to use their intuitive circuitry better than most people do. Some adults have so badly fried their intuitive circuitry that they can longer hear a damn thing from God/Spirit/Source/angels, though the potential is there -- just as the potential to echolocate is there for both sighted and non-sighted people. This potential can be developed with proper training, practice, and commitment. With the proper development of the brain's intuitive circuitry, anyone can strengthen their relationship with God (who's talking to us all the time, whether or not we consciously realize it.)

Here's a great quote from the article:

"Kish's training curriculum differs from tradition by taking an immersive approach intended to activate environmental awareness. It's a tough-love approach with very little hand-holding. He encourages children to explore their home environment for themselves and discourages family members from interfering unless the child otherwise could be harmed."

Welcome to my life! Tough-love is the key. This won't please anyone who goes to a weekend workshop and expects to emerge as an expert in intuition. But if you're willing to do the work, you can gradually learn how to create a map of your relationship with God.

Keep in mind, though, that intuition isn't a "divine gift" that's dropped fully formed into your head because you've asked for it in prayer. It's more like a packet of seeds you have to nurture if you want the stems to grow into a reliable support for your life. 

With practice, intuition helps you know where to walk -- and when -- so you can feel God's presence in your life. And all you need is your own 3D brain.

Addendum Nov. 5, 2017: Two other unusual but very real "frontiers" of neuroscience -- blindsight and tetrachromacy -- also relate to how I use my biological brain to communicate on a quantum level with God/Spirit/Source/angels. You can read more about blindsight and tetrachromacy here:

 BBC - Future - Blindsight: the strangest form of consciousness

 Human Eye Sometimes Sees the Unseeable - Scientific American

 BBC - Future - The women with superhuman vision
 

LSP42: Gordian Knots in the Faith/Science/Religion Debate

On March 1, 2015, Scientific American blogger John Horgan posted a written reply he'd received from John Lennox on the question of whether religion and science can coexist. John Horgan (whose views are agnostic) had debated the question with John Lennox (whose views are Christian) at the Stevens Institute of Technology. Horgan posted Lennox's follow-up letter, and readers of the blog were then free to comment.

Here is my response, posted in the comment section on April 27, 2015 (with typos now fixed):

___________________________________________________
 

Religion isn't just "one thing." Faith isn't just "one thing." The human brain (where both religion and faith are experienced) isn't just "one thing." Anyone who tries to reduce these incredibly complex questions to simple either-or explanations isn't paying attention to reality. Photo credit JAT 2026.

 

In my experience, the real question is not whether religion and science can coexist, but whether religion and faith can coexist.

@4 Paul Topping wrote, "In my mind, the main 'proof' that convinces me of the atheist point of view is that people have so many different religions with such different explanations. . . . The only reasonable conclusion is that they are all wrong and that belief in religion is just something that some people have like blue eyes."

When I read a comment such as this (and there are many these days) I know the individual hasn't taken the time and trouble to use objective research tools to examine key questions about religion -- questions examined with tools such as historicity, source criticism, socio-rhetorical criticism, and cost-benefit analyses from political, economic, social, military, and legal perspectives in the contexts in which the doctrines arose. Most importantly, when superficial assessments of religion are offered, it's quickly clear that all questions about neurophysiology have been shelved.

Shelving questions about neurophysiology isn't reserved for those who claim to espouse the methodology of science. Shelving questions about how and why the human mind works in relationship with the rest of the universe is one of theology's least helpful contributions to humankind, in my opinion. I've read theological arguments so convoluted in their efforts to avoid the question of how and why the human mind works that they make a Gordian knot look like a simple twist tie.

Theology is increasingly understood today as some sort of withering branch of philosophical thought, a deservedly marginalized branch of human thought that has now been proudly replaced by the randomized, double-blind study method, etc.

Those who've studied the history of theological evolution, however, know that all early schools of theological thought (no matter what "religion" they're linked with today) arose from careful study of scientific principles followed by the application of scientific observations to questions of human character, morality, Law (nomos in Greek), justice, disease, healing, mental health, and the pursuit of happiness.

It's not possible from a scientific perspective to reasonably argue that human beings 5,000 years ago (when the roots of today's religions really took hold in the soil of technological advances) had DNA so vastly different from ours that they couldn't use their brains in ways virtually identical to the ways we do. It's not reasonable to argue that they couldn't see for themselves the destructive issues of psychopathy, narcissism, sadism, and machiavellianism without the benefit of today's research and today's DSM-V (which hasn't the courage to include psychopathy in its lauded pages).

Just as we continue to struggle today with these issues, our ancestors took steps to limit the destructive power of certain human choices that spring from Axis II issues. One of the tools each major culture developed was religious doctrine. But religious doctrine wasn't set apart from questions of politics, economics, healing, justice, legal codes, and scientific inquiry. To attack religion as if it has ever been a separate and unnecessary "entity" -- like a dead tree branch that can be lopped off -- is just plain sloppy and lazy from a methodological viewpoint.

Religious doctrines reflect the times and the cultural necessities from which they were born. This is why names and places change from religion to religion, but underlying concerns about destructive human choices don't. Such concerns are universal to the human condition because a psychopath by any other name is still a psychopath. (Members of the Greek pantheon, for instance, certainly seem to be archetypes for the human behaviours we find least desirable: narcissism, fickleness, lust, power-mongering, status addiction, and lack of empathy. Sound like any world leaders you know?)

Religious doctrines, however useful they may have been over the centuries from a political point of view, typically reflect a Materialist cause-and-effect understanding of science, which is quite useful and practical on a day-to-day basis. (Can't argue with classical physics when it comes to everyday usefulness.) The one thing major world religions don't do well, however, is to reflect the needs of FAITH -- a highly influential current of human experience, mostly expressed through System 1 thinking patterns in the brain. System 1 patterns have always paralleled -- and continue to parallel -- the more rigid, linear, Materialist thinking patterns of the human brain's newer System 2 processes.

The experience of faith is the experience of the presence of God in our daily lives. It may or may not be linked to membership in a formal religion.

For me, faith is a relationship with God that endures in the absence of sacred texts. It's an experience that can't be placed within the restrictive boxes of religious doctrinal traditions or texts -- or, for that matter, the restrictive boxes of Materialist cause-and-effect scientific traditions or theories. (Same thing, really.) Faith, far from being just a fanciful belief, is rooted 100% in the most objective scientific realities of the biological brain.

I won't bore you with my own experiences, but if you're interested in opening your heart and mind to what this faith experience might be, I'd recommend the awe-inspiring book Man's Search by Meaning by Dr. Viktor Frankl. Any scientific questions we have about the experience of faith, love, forgiveness, and the human search for meaning must take into account the data collected by Dr. Frankl under some of the most searing and horrendous conditions humankind has ever known: the European Holocaust.

Dr. Frankl, as both participant and scientific observer of the "best" and "worst" in human behaviour, introduced data into the faith/science/religion debate that must, at the very least, be considered from a falsifiability perspective.

It's not enough for any sort of "ism" promoter (whether scientism or religious fundamentalism -- same thing, really) to make lofty claims about the origins of evil and suffering. (Did you know, for instance, that Tertullian's late 2nd century CE doctrine of original sin -- a theory now called Traducianism -- tried to account for human evil on biological grounds?) Ideologues must also account for the data of innate goodness collected by less lofty and less voluble speakers such as the late Dr. Frankl.

Therein lies the really juicy stuff.

LSP41: 16 Reasons Why My Life Is Better with God

Dear God, although I know you didn't ask, here are 16 reasons why my life is better with you:

Photo credit JAT 2018

1. You've redefined everything for me about the meaning of success.

2. You've taught me that Love isn't weak or passive, but is incredibly strong and tough and durable.

3. You've taught me that Forgiveness is the most radical catalyst for change we can know.

4. You've shown me that Healing always follows Insight.

5. You've reminded me that when we Heal others, we also Heal ourselves.

6. You've whispered to me in a few of your many languages, and I'm so glad to listen to what you say to us through Science.

7. You inspire me with your example of patience.

8. You've freed me from the crippling disease of status addiction.

9. You've taught me how to care for my brain so I can use my small but worthy "three-pound universe" to listen, learn, and love.

10. You've shown me by your example that it's okay to say No when brains begin to shock us with their anger, hatred, perfectionism, and deceit.

11. You make it okay for me to smile, laugh, and enjoy all the weirdness of quantum science miracles.

12. Your faith in me helps me get up in the morning.

13. Your example of courage sustains me when the going gets really rough.

14. Your Music brings tears of joy to my Heart.

15. Your Planet (one of many!) teaches me what courage, trust, gratitude, and devotion can build when the Heart expands the limited vision of the Mind.

16. When I feel you holding my neighbour's hand, my soul smiles in peace.

Mother & Father God, you are my heroes!

LSP40: Atheism: Blindness to the Question of Scale

The National Post has been very brave in the past few days.

First, it ran a major story on the current religious beliefs of Canadians. The article, called "A God? That's complicated. Canadians hanging on to personal faith as organized religion declines: poll," was published on April 5, 2015 and was based on a new Angus Reid poll.

Second, the Post offered readers a chance to answer the question "Do You Believe in God?" Not only did the Post print a selection of the letters it received, it allowed 966 on-line comments before finally closing the debate.

It was great to see such an enormous spectrum of thought in one place. Comments ranged from extreme atheism to extreme fideism, with everything in between. It was refreshing and encouraging to see an actual debate with thoughtful and cogent offerings from regular Canadians on a topic that matters to many. The Post editors, bucking the current trend of sanitizing and pre-packaging controversial ideas so no one's feelings will be hurt, took the audacious approach of allowing breadth in the debate. I applaud the editors for their courage.*

Something that emerged for me as I reflected on the varied comments was a better understanding of the schism that exists between atheists and theists.

One comment, written by a prolific comment writer named Life's Traveller, really drew my attention and prompted me to reply. In part, this is what he (she?) said:

In terms of religions, I just can't accept anything that my equally (and in many cases, greatly over-achievingly) ignorant fellow humans have to say about this. When we all hear the same, clear and consistent, story, straight from god with no human mediation (prophets, etc.), with ample amounts of irrefutable direct evidence, and explanations, testable under the most rigorous conditions that the brightest among us can devise, then I'll conditionally accept it ... perhaps.

I challenged this line of reasoning a couple of times, then Life Traveller came back with this:

"The God I trust and the God who sustains me every day is the God I see everywhere around me in the world of science" [quoting my previous comment]
Please be specific, and include your reasoning as to why exactly the god that you speak of in personal terms (who you trust and who sustains you), is absolutely necessary for whatever example that you choose to produce as a valid demonstration of the presence/existence/influence of "a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity" (according to Oxford).

It took me all night to figure out why this line of reasoning (a line of reasoning shared by many atheists) is so psychologically and spiritually abusive when aimed at those of us who believe in God.

It's abusive because of the implicit assumption it tries to force on me. (I'm using myself here as an example of a person of faith, but I think other people of faith feel this way, too, in the face of militant atheism). It tries at the very outset to force me to agree to take on the "burden of proof" for someone else who is either too lazy or too narcissistic to accept the responsibility for using his or her own brain in the most balanced, holistic way possible. It tries to force me to put on blinders (as if I can't see God in the world "out there"). It tries to force me to use only human laws and human reasoning (as if I can't see God uses universal laws, not human laws). It tries to force me to agree with the fairy tale imaginings of human minds that worship Materialism (and worship themselves). Then, when I balk at these unfair starting assumptions (because they're not based in scientific reality), I'll be blamed for bringing mouldy bread to the table instead of the pure goblet of "truth." It will all be my fault, according to the atheist. And because it's my fault, I'll deserve to be punished. This will make it okay for the atheist to deride me, deride God, and raise him/herself up on a pedestal of smug superiority.

All the while, he's assuming his interpretations of the laws of physics are "right." He's using his "right to be right" as a foundation, a starting place, and he intends to sit in his comfortable place of "rightness" and feast on the imperfections and inadequacies of humans who believe in God. Sure, it's schadenfreude disguised as the pure goblet of truth, but if the atheist can keep me from noticing that -- if he can keep me thinking it's all my fault that he's so miserable -- then can he enjoy a lasting banquet of guilt, shame, inadequacy, and unworthiness from those of us who buy into his Materialist fairy tale.

But, you know, it's not my fault.

It's not my fault that the atheist has consciously and willingly chosen to believe that the Materialist laws of cause and effect govern everything in the universe. It's not my fault that the atheist has chosen to deny that the laws of physics governing baryonic matter represent only a small fraction of the total number of laws of physics in the universe. (Baryonic matter, which makes up the atoms and molecules we think of as "real" while we're on Planet Earth, represents only about 4 to 5% of the total energy of the known universe.) It's not my fault that the atheist can't -- or won't -- see the complexity and weirdness and relationships that govern quantum interactions.

It's not my responsibility to bring to the atheist's table a "proof" based solely on Materialist laws of cause and effect.

It's especially not my responsibility that the atheist simply can't cope with the questions and complexities that arise from scale.

It isn't possible to talk about God without always bearing in mind the question of scale. God the Mother and God the Father are very, very big. They're also very, very smart. To ask anyone to describe God using only their own personal experiences and their own personal scientific knowledge is not fair, not justifiable, and not even a tiny bit humble. Each one of us can provide only a small piece of the overall portrait of God. Each small piece is important and valid, but no one piece (and no one person) can provide everything we hope to know. 

For those of us living as human beings on Planet Earth, we can't begin to get a sense of who God is unless we're willing to approach the question of God with scale in mind.

 

In April 2024, a total solar eclipse was visible from Nova Scotia, Canada. Although I safely watched the eclipse through my approved glasses, I used the camera on my phone to photograph some of the interesting light effects. If you look closely, you'll see the camera captured a large, bubble-shaped reflection (superimposed over the trees) with a tiny "moon-bitten crescent sun" hovering in the middle of the bubble. That's a reflection of what the eclipse looked like at the time I snapped the photo. Photo credit JAT 2024.

To get a true snapshot of who God really is, we'd have to take a poll of all living creatures -- both past and present -- on Planet Earth and then collate all our individual experiences and insights into a vast meta-study. It wouldn't be sufficient to poll only human beings. Human beings represent a small portion of God's children on Planet Earth, and human experiences are necessarily narrow in scope compared to the whole picture of God's relationship with Creation. Humans don't have all the answers.

Humans who want to know God and be in relationship with God have to get over their own human self-importance. They have to accept with humbleness and courage that about 95% of the laws of physics governing their lives are not straightforward and not predictable and not within their complete and utter control. (Have you met any atheists who aren't controlling Type A perfectionists? I haven't.)

You're only human, and the fact that you get to play with even 4–5% of the laws of physics while you're here is really quite something (when you think of the whole scale of Creation, that is).

But don't be thinkin' God is required to squeeze into that small little packet of baryonic reality (like the Genie in Aladdin's Lamp) so you can be spared the challenge of "thinking bigger." If you want to know God, you're going to have to get outside your comfort zone and you're going to have to accept that what you find out there won't be designed from a neat and tidy human point of view. 

As the X-files used to say, "The proof is out there."

Or maybe, more properly, in there -- where quantum reality lies.

God bless.

 

 

* Addendum September 11, 2026: Sadly, I fear this kind of courage would be lacking in today's polarized political climate. Along these lines, the current editorial trends of the National Post no longer align with my own centrist beliefs.

LSP39: Try This Prayer Instead (The Dawn Prayer)

The Dawn Prayer (full version)

Gracious God,
What I long for more than anything
is to walk with you and hear the world as you do.
I long more anything for my Heart to be healed
so I may hear your song
and know your breath
and smile at the rush of your dawn-filled wings.
I feel so small
and so crushed
and I can't seem to hear you anymore.
I know this isn't what you wish for me.
Please show me the way back to your Heart
and to my Heart, too.
Please help me hear you
when you say you love me.
I know you love me.
Thank you.
Amen.

The Dawn Prayer (short version: post this where you'll see it several times per day, e.g. on refrigerator door):

Dear God, I know you love me. Thank you. Amen.


by Jesus and Jen, March 26, 2015

LSP38: How Prayer Practices Look to Your Angels

If you want to drive your guardian angel crazy, follow these 2014 instructions from the United Church of Canada for praying during Lent:

M&S Lenten Calendar 2014

March 5: Pray for strength for the journey of deepening faith and spiritual growth.

March 6: Offer a prayer of thanks for those in your life who have been examples of faithful believers.

March 7: Pray for your family and give thanks for other encouragers in your life.

March 8: Offer a prayer of thanks for God’s gift of the presence of the spirit in your life.

March 9: Pray for all those who live with spiritual hunger.

March 10: Pray for strength for someone facing a challenge.

March 11: Pray that you will put trust in God during a challenge you face.

March 12: Pray in a place that is special to you.

March 13: Pray for our leaders in the world.

March 14: Pray for those who search for justice.

March 15: Offer a prayer of thanks for spiritual comfort which God offers to all.

March 16: Pray for all those who serve the church.

March 17: Pray while walking in silence.

March 18: Pray for forgiveness for a failing of yours.

March 19: Sing a prayer today.

March 20: Pray that your decisions will be guided by the spirit.

March 21: Pray that your actions will reflect a Christian spirit.

March 22: Offer a prayer of thanks for the season.

March 23: Let the Holy Spirit guide you as you pray today.

March 24: Pray that the spirit will open your heart.

March 25: Pray that you can generously forgive others or yourself.

March 26: Pray in a new way or place or at a different time of day.

March 27: Pray for deepened trust in God and in the spirit of others.

March 28: Pray for laughter and joy in your life.

March 29: Pray that a conflict you feel will end with peace in your life.

March 30: Pray for those who face discrimination.

March 31: Pray that you will smile at everyone you meet.

April 1: Pray that today you can share the Good News.

April 2: Pray as a group or in the company of others.

April 3: Pray for deepened understanding of Christ’s message.

April 4: Pray for all who struggle with their faith.

April 5: Pray that God will walk with you.

April 6: Pray for “the luck of the Irish” in your life.

April 7: Pray for true joy in sharing the love of God.

April 8: Pray that you will see the beauty around you.

April 9: Pray in the morning and when the sun goes down.

April 10: Pray for our planet and all of God’s creation.

April 11: Pray for those in Canada who lack safe drinking water.

April 12: Pray for The United Church of Canada and its world mission.

April 13: Palm Sunday–Pray for those living in the Holy Land.

April 14: Pray for our Mission partners around the world.

April 15: Pray for the children who live in poverty.

April 16: Pray five times today.

April 17: Maundy Thursday–Pray for your faith community.

April 18: Good Friday–Pray that you will meet faith challenges.

April 19: Pray for faith in yourself and those you love.

The reason you'll drive your guardian angels crazy is that your guardian angels know how your brain actually works and they know you'll feel incredibly frustrated if you pray in a way that confuses and stymies your biological brain. Relationship with God depends on your ability to process incoming information from God and your angels, so effective spiritual practices are those that work with your brain instead of against it. Keep it simple, keep it sane!

With prayer, as with all spiritual practices, there's an easy way and there's a hard way. Your angels are very keen on the easy way (since being an angel-in-human-form is hard enough for you on the best of days). The prayer calendar above is the hard way.

This is how the above calendar looks to your angels:

How Prayer Practices Look to Your Angels: When you use 46 different prayers over the Lenten period, your biological brain sees it as 46 different maps (instead of a single, unified map!) After a while, your brain stops paying attention to the prayers because there's no consistency to them and therefore no chance of building strong inter-neuronal connections. On the other hand, your brain will pay attention to one clearly written prayer repeated earnestly each day for a minimum of 6 weeks. (Six weeks is the minimum amount of time it takes the brain to build a new neuron -- and building neurons and inter-neuronal connections is the key to long-term learning and change!) Credit JAT 2015.

Next year, why not try to easy way? Pick one prayer, reflect on it in the morning and again in the evening, and try to find small messages, synchronicities, or reminders during the course of your everyday life that relate to the one prayer you've chosen. You'll be surprised at what you notice when you're only asking your brain to follow one map at a time. It doesn't mean you're being spiritually lazy -- it means you're respecting God's wishes for you!