Surely, i must be the most stupid of men

“Surely I must be the most stupid of men, bereft of human intelligence, I have not learnt wisdom, and I lack the knowledge of the holy ones,” Proverbs 30:2-3.

Wisdom is the most elusive of virtues. The very thought of having it seems to take it away, as if it’s intrinsically ironic, cursed to never be possessed. I like to think I know a little about a lot of things, but in truth I don’t know a damn thing. Let's consider the existence, or non-existence, of an all-knowing and omniscient being we in the west call God. Voltaire said (in French of course) that if God didn’t exist it would be necessary to invent him. But, Voltaire also considered the existence of God a fact not based on faith but on reason. And make no mistake, Voltaire believed in God’s existence. My non-contextual rebuttal to his statement would be that, for me, an imaginary God is better than no God. It may take me a while to prove that, but bear with me if you like, or move on to something more adjusted to your taste.

There is one religion. It’s not Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddahism, Taoism, Hinduism, Rastafarianism, Humanism or any other -ism. It’s just the Way. I’m not trying to create a religion, only to share what I think I know. You be the judge.

I also think that Jesus Christ walked the Earth and was God in the flesh. Now, even Christians have a hard time understanding that Christ was God, as most of them consider Christ a part of God, a son of God, as in the holy trinity. This is of course true, but it lacks the fundamental understanding of eternal existence. How can our finite minds truly comprehend eternity? Is it even possible? The first law of thermodynamics states that matter is neither created nor destroyed in a chemical reaction. But what does that even mean? If nothing is created or destroyed in a chemical reaction, and chemical reactions are the pulse of all life in the universe as we know it, then all matter is a recombination of atoms, a recycling of molecules, a reformation of basic life elements. I may be 30 years old, but my atoms are as old as the universe.

Now, I am not eternal, as my molecules were created somehow (in my mind, by God) at some point in time. A point. In time. That is how we understand just about everything, isn’t it? Our environment, our experiences, our knowledge, it all has a beginning and an end. It is finite. So, first we must grasp our true physical nature before we can even think of trying to understand eternity and eternal wisdom.

If the universe is 13 billion years old, than we are all 13 billion years old (We should all be getting the senior discounts everywhere we go and AARP should be raking in the dough). The atoms that form my physical body were perhaps a tree at one time, perhaps a person, a bottle, water, a rock, a cloud, a star, fire, dust. From dust to dust. When I die and my physical body decomposes in the dirt. If I were to allow my body to be buried directly in the dirt, eventually I would decompose, my molecules would be absorbed into the earth where a fruit tree might grow, taking up my molecules to grow its fruit. Then maybe a person comes by and grabs the fruit, taking my molecules and making energy, then poop. Dust to dust to dust to dust. In some traditions it’s called reincarnation.

But that’s still only the physical world, only a point in time. Now, let’s consider the imaginary God. What does an imaginary God represent? Eternity. Without the concept of an imaginary God, the concept of eternity does not exist, because without God, without eternity, everything is based on a point in time. With the imaginary God, there is the concept of eternity. An athiest would perhaps argue that eternity does exist without God. But this concept of eternity is only a vague abstraction at best, as it does nothing to answer the question of eternal wisdom. It also begs the question, or rather the idea, that everything, the universe, life, our planet, everything began at a point in time. Reality, in an atheistic worldview, is based on structured time. Even if it is unanswerable, as for the agnostic, the search for the answer lies in the idea of time. Of course, the open-minded atheist may argue that time is relative to space and that time can be bent and manipulated, even overcome, perhaps, if by anything, through the brute force of human invention. Science (which by the way is not separate from God, but only seeks to understand God’s language–nature [see Darwin]) offers us finite solutions with finite possibilities because it is based on finite principals. It is safe and rational because it can be seen and tested and proved and retested. Even with quantum physics exploding the doors of contemporary science, it still only proves that what we know is only a fraction of a percentage of what there is to know. We are all wise in our own eyes until we see in our reflection that we have no eyes.

Now there is, of course, the question of language and semantics. How many names does God have and why am I using the word God to describe God? Call it laziness, lack of wit, contempt for ingenuity. I merely think that the word God represents eternal wisdom and love, the never-ending flow of energy that blows life into nothing to create something. Eternal. The name doesn’t matter, as one day I am sure that we will have an opportunity to ask God what names God prefers. Pronouns for God are also superfluous, as the word “superfluous” is also superfluous.

The imaginary God is simultaneously personal and abstract. God is the mystery that atheists ponder but refuse to acknowledge out of sheer rebellion, fear and repulsion from religion. The imaginary God is everything and nothing. Imagine for a second, what our perceptions are based on. Our five senses. If we were born without the capacity to see, hear, taste, touch or smell, what would our reality consist of? How would we generate thoughts if we had no language to represent thought? Would we even be human? How could we communicate in that senseless world? Ironically enough, the physical world, as mathematics is beginning to prove, is only a fraction of the realities that are possible. But we are obsessed with consciousness, and there is no other understanding of reality aside from physical perceptions that we can accept because we are truly incapable of stepping outside of our five senses and into the eternal light.

So imagine the imaginary God in a world where God does not exist. What does that God stand for? As I mentioned, God represents the eternal, the no-beginning/no-ending life force that is the reason for everything. Or, imagine a world where God does not exist. The closest thing to God in this world would be mathematics, which, through numbers such as pi, create the illusion that there is infinity. In any number system, you are bound by rules, by a finite set of parameters that must be adhered to. With any man-made creation, there is a finite limit to its abilities and use. Such is the world where God does not exist. Limited solely to the ingenuity of mankind and the tumult of nature which exists solely as a giant cosmic accident. A belch in the creation of universe.

But in the world of the imaginary God, where human beings use the (imaginary) eternal connection to them to transcend the physical world and become a true saint (read Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Mother Teresa, and all the Dalai Lamas, monks, ascetics and regular joes and joans who used that (imaginary) connection to the eternal to elevate their consciousness beyond the ego and into the realm of pure servant to humankind. That, to me, is the human way. Unfortunately we have not lived like humans throughout our entire existence. We try, but we fail, as we are our own worst enemies. The bombs we build to protect us from evil only make the evil create bombs to protect it from us (which, in the eyes of whom we perceive as “evil,” we are actually the evil ones. When was the last time a dictator committed genocide or human atrocities and knew that it was evil? On the contrary, good intentions [Hitler, Milosovic, Lenin, etc.] mask the reality of evil.) Few people are evil for evil’s sake. They consider themselves doing good for humanity, ridding the world of “evil” through evil means. As Gandhi said, an eye for an eye leaves both sides blind. We are all wise in our own eyes, until we realize we are in fact blind.

Which brings me to humanism. A beautiful, secular way to put morality into one’s life while maintaining religious neutrality and spiritual autonomy. I met a young lady once who told me she was a humanist, and I asked her what that meant to her. She told me that it meant to do good for the sake of goodness, to treat people the way you want to be treated, the golden rule. When I asked her what “good” means, she said of course something that helps people, or does something positive for society. One can imagine the Socratic questioning method continuing ad nauseam. If I ask her what kinds of things are positive for society, we will engage in that catch 22 that will inevitably leave her frustrated that her point was never made, and myself equally frustrated because I never enabled her to better understand her point. The real question here is this. Is her good work actually doing good for someone else? If she, in her eyes, is helping someone, is she in fact helping that person? Or is she, rather by virtue of the intended goodness in her act, merely serving her own desire to do good? It’s the karmic butterfly effect. Our actions, good intended or not, have consequences that we cannot possibly fathom. If we give a homeless person money, how do we know it’s good to do that? If we help an old lady cross the street, how do we know it was good? Maybe she hates to be touched. Maybe she has a contagious disease. Maybe she’s crazy and all she does is cross the street all day. But should we not do good because it’s impossible to know the consequences? Of course not. But, we should only do good because it is right, meaning that we do it with great love for ourselves and our fellow human being because of the undying and sacrificial love shown us by our Creator. Of course, a humanist will say, “That’s what I do!” But without God in our life, our knowledge of who we are is stunted and we will never know the full depth of existence through our eternal creator. Again the argument will be, “But how does that make what you do good and what a humanist does not good? Just by a belief in God?” Not the belief in God, but in the pursuit of the understanding of the eternal love God has for all life, especially the stewards of the earth, human beings.

I’d like to interject a bible proverb if I may. “The fear of God is the beginning of knowledge.” This statement used to confound me. I used to take it to mean, one can not know anything until one knows God. This is partially true. But the beauty of great literature such as the bible is that the words are alive, always changing and growing, yet staying the same the entire time. But the depth of this statement was made clear to me by Van Til’s Apologetic, which is a heavy treatise on the virtue of Christianity. Van Til argues that the fear of God precedes knowledge, but is also placed in front of God, that is to say, knowledge only exists because God has allowed it to be in our lives. When I profess I know something, the fear of God must be present before my knowledge, or else the knowledge is useless, vain, and an extension of my ego rather than an emulation of my eternal creator to whom I owe all my knowledge.

Say for example, my friend Mark went skiing and was chased by a bear down a mountain and barely escaped with his life. A few weeks after he tells me, I get into a conversation about bears and I remember Mark’s story. But because I’m in the presence of people who I want to impress for some reason, I might embellish the story a bit, make it more exciting, maybe add in that he got bit. But if Mark were there, I’d have to tell them how he told me, or allow him to tell the story, because the knowledge came from him. It’s his, and I have no right to disrespect him like that. Such is the nature of all knowledge with God. We must respect the eternal wisdom (God) whenever we profess our knowledge, and know that God is the source of all true wisdom.

No other fear exists when one fears God. This is no license to do whatever one wishes if they believe God wants it to happen. This is where true knowledge of God is important. God wants us to love one another, to give without expectation, to love our enemy, to pray for those who persecute us, to give to those who ask, and to live a quiet and contemplative life. God shows us the eternal plan for us time and time again, but we constantly ignore God’s wishes and pursue our own interests, like religious expansion, nationalism and the pursuit of material wealth. Ninety-nine percent of the people who say they believe in God do not live as though they believe in God.

I am not here to change people. People are individuals, especially in western society and deeply in American society. If we were not individuals, if we did not view our personal selves as special by virtue of our consciousness, then we would not have 50,000 religions that serve to confuse more people than a French restaurant menu. If Christianity served the teachings of Yeshua (Jesus), there would be no Christianity, only people serving God through selfless action and humble hearts. If Islam served the teachings of Mohammed, there would be no Islam, only people serving God through selfless action and humble hearts. And on an on through the religions we go.

But I can not talk ill of religion, because through it mankind has gained its most profound insights, if not directly, than as a a result against its power. Many a Bill Maher fan will complain that religion is the real culprit behind the world’s problems. And yet, to me, it seems that this argument is only partially true. Religion, to me, is humankind’s attempts to reconcile our infinite nature. Not, eternal nature. I will offer a semantic argument here, so forgive me, but I see infinite as having a beginning with no end and eternal as having no beginning and no end. So, religion is our attempt to reconcile our infinite nature in connection to the eternal life force.

Religion is a tool, a spiritual hammer. It can be used to build a house or kill someone. Unfortunately for us, our minds are so trapped in the physical world that our understanding of God is limited to the physical world. That is why we are so confused by religion, because it is intended to show us through physical means the nature of eternal wisdom and our infinite spiritual state. That is far too much for us to handle with our finite concept of reality, so we constantly twist it and bend it and use it against our enemies in the name of God, but the whole time God is showing us his love in his creation and in certain people. If God actually chose to speak to each one of us individually, the entire human race would go insane. My goodness, we can’t even understand what other people say about God, how in the hell are we supposed to understand God! If we are such egoists, that we think the existence of God is negated by the fact that religions relate the word of God as spoken to a few individuals and God, if God exists, should speak to everyone in the same fashion, than that egotism is exactly why we have the problems we have today. And, by the way, God does speak to everyone, but in a subtle and universal language called nature. We are just too ignorant and proud to see it.

“For what can be known about God is perfectly plain... since God himself has made it plain. Ever since God created the world his everlasting power and diety–however invisible–have been there for the mind to see in the things he has made. That is why [non-believers] are without excuse: they knew God and yet refused to [believe in] him as God or to thank him; instead they made nonsense out of logic and their empty minds were darkened. The more they called themselves philosophers, the more stupid they grew, until they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for a worthless imitation, for the [creations] of mortal man.” Romans 1:18-23

For centuries, Catholics would not allow lay people to read the bible as the Vatican feared it was blasphemous. Conceptually, I agree, because if the bible were truly the word of God, how can we expect everyone to understand the word of God? If God is all-knowing and eternal, whose wisdom crosses all boundaries of our wildest imaginations, than how can people be expected to understand God’s word, if it indeed exists? If people can’t understand a high school dropout’s poetry (Lil Wayne), how can we expect people to understand eternal wisdom?

But no human being has the right to oppress any other human being, for any reason, in my opinion. No human being, or group of humans, has the right to dictate what knowledge the masses is allowed to learn. Oh wait, I just described our public school system. But that’s a topic for another day.

So, this imaginary God. This God, even though it only exists in our minds, allows for our minds to at least accept the idea of eternity. Why did it have to be God that created the universe? Why couldn’t it have been an accident? But what preceded the accident? The agnostic questions come from a good place, but they can not use time-based reasoning as an argument for the origin of the universe. The only way for anything to be created is by a creator. Call it God, call it whatever you want. But ignoring the eternal is ignoring the very heart that beats within us. It is denying that heart the blood that carries its oxygen. It is denying our mind that connection to creation that burns deep in all our souls. It is killing the pulse and rhythm of the world, the music of our spirits, the beat of our perpetual blissful existence. To deny the existence of God is to forego all the knowledge in the world to human imagination, as if a tree is nothing, but an automobile is everything. If knowledge is based strictly on experience, than there is no knowledge, because no two experiences are the same and there are an infinite number of experiences that can take place along the line of time. This knowledge is useless because it is finite and will one day end, no matter what human invention we create to preserve it, it will end. But the eternal knowledge, the eternal wisdom, even if it’s imaginary, takes the mind to infinite possibilities of knowledge. Understanding the illusion of the physical world allows for the reality of our infinite nature to take hold, and opens our minds to the possibility of eternal wisdom. Imaginary or not, God exists, and my mind is better for it, how about yours?