Change Begins with a Dream
Wed, 01/30/2008 - 22:15 | rlp
Note: There is an audio file of this essay below it.
I recently watched “Roving Mars,” a documentary film about Spirit and Opportunity, the two rovers sent by NASA to explore the surface of Mars. NASA’s main mission was to find evidence that water once existed on the Red Planet. The evidence for that seems clear now. Mars once had enough water to make a significant mark on its geological landscape.
NASA’s greater goal is to find out if life exists outside of the earth. The only life-model we have is our own, and water seems to be the essential ingredient. To that end, scientists are seeking to find water on celestial bodies that are close enough for our analysis. One of Jupiter’s moons, Europa, seems another likely candidate for study. Primitive life may be found in the waters below the ice cap of Europa. If so, it would be the most important scientific discovery in the history of humankind. For if life occurs twice in the same solar system, then you can assume the universe is teeming with life forms of unimaginable diversity.
While watching the film I was moved almost to tears by the commitment of the science team to their twin rovers and to the small step they are taking in the history of human knowledge. They love Spirit & Opportunity, and many on the team are convinced that the rovers have distinct personalities. Opportunity seems more reliable, while Spirit seems to be rather impish and prone to trouble.
The rovers were designed to be operational for about 90 days. That they have continued to work for four years is miraculous. But the day is coming when their exhausted batteries will finally expend the last of their energy. The rover wheels will creak forward one final inch and then freeze in place, never to move again. Spirit and Opportunity will then sit perfectly still while time passes, and they are slowly coated with the red dust that covers that planet.
Will we send more rovers to Mars? Will humans one day land there and perhaps bring one of the rovers home? At this point we cannot say what will happen to Spirit and Opportunity because no one knows how much more of our resources will be put into the exploration of our solar system and the universe beyond it.
There are several natural barriers for any species that hopes to explore the Cosmos. Gravity and technology are among them. And the speed of light presents its own set of difficulties. The first two we have conquered, and the third is perhaps for another age of humanity to solve.
But there is one barrier that is making it hard for us to even get started.
Economics.
It is very expensive to explore the Cosmos. The resources it takes to explore even our own solar system are staggering. The United States is the wealthiest nation on earth, if we are talking about technology and the ability to use it. And yet it takes all that we can muster, economically, to put a couple of rovers on the planet that is closest to us. It cost 820 million dollars to put Spirit and Opportunity on Mars. It costs about 3 million dollars a month to keep them running and to analyze the information they send back. Imagine how much it would cost to put a couple of people on Mars.
Currently we have spent nearly a trillion dollars on the war in Iraq*. No one really knows how much we will end up spending because there are so many hidden costs.
It is not my purpose to make a case for whether or not we should be at war. I happen to think we should not, but that’s not the point here. I simply observe that as long as we are at war, we will never have the resources to learn very much about the Universe. Because of this war, things that might have been known in our lifetime will go unknown for decades, perhaps longer if this war leads to other wars, as they often do. That’s too bad. I’d really like to be alive when we get our first peek into the waters of Europa. But that may not happen in my lifetime.
The question is: How do we want to spend our money? Do we want to explore the heavens or do we want to fight amongst ourselves? Amazing, isn’t it, how global politics begins to sound like something from an elementary school playground?
It’s easy for ordinary people to feel that we have little or no control over how the government spends our money. It seems that there is nothing we can do about it. But if the scientists who sent Spirit and Opportunity to Mars can find joy in giving their lives to that one small step of knowledge, perhaps you and I could find joy in taking one small step of our own toward peace.
And that first step might mean using our imagination. It might mean being willing to have a dream. Change often begins when people have a dream. Martin Luther King Jr. certainly taught us that. So you and I have to dream. We have to imagine a different kind of future for ourselves and our children. And we have to want that future badly enough to shout and march and demonstrate and do whatever it takes to move humanity in another direction.
Imagine what the world would be like if we humans could cooperate and work together across national boundaries, using more and more of our global resources to help others live well enough to share in our common, human thirst for knowledge. Can you imagine that world? You want to send a probe to Europa? No problem. You want to explore other planets? Can do. You want to make sure that every child has food to eat and medical care? Absolutely.
Okay now stop. Stop for a moment. I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking it’s a nice dream, but it’s never going to happen. You’re thinking I’m a starry-eyed dreamer with some beautiful but impossible ideas. Well, I am a starry-eyed dreamer; I admit that. But I’m also a thoughtful man who considers things carefully and is aware of the limitations of humanity.
I’m very aware of what human history has shown us about our nature and our capacity for evil.
You see, my own spiritual tradition contains the idea that something is broken in our hearts. Our selfishness and our need for money and power and pleasure is not going to be overcome solely by wishing and dreaming, though that is the first step. In the Christian tradition, the climax of our central story has a lot to say about how deeply evil is rooted in the world and how costly and difficult it is to set things right.
Most spiritual traditions teach that we need to be changed, and that change is imagined as a kind of spiritual transformation.
- It happens when an alcoholic finds a power greater than herself and is changed so that she finds sobriety.
- It happens when you see a powerful movie or documentary, and your eyes are opened to some issue or truth.
- It happens when fiercely independent people reach the end of their resources and cry out for help.
Something snaps or breaks in your soul and you are never the same. That’s what I’m talking about when I say a spiritual transformation.
It breaks my heart to know that the various spiritual traditions of humankind have not shown others a clear vision of global peace. While the world fights over land and resources and ideology, we have fought over ridiculous minutia, theological language, and over which of our religions is the right one.
That’s got to stop.
I’ve had a vision, you see. I’m a little embarrassed to say so because I’m not really a vision sort of guy, but I keep having this crazy idea that maybe the age of exclusivity is passing away. It’s passing away slowly, like racism and nationalism and indifference to the health of our environment, but it IS passing away. Religious exclusivism had its day, but the sun it setting and a new dawn awaits. There are now people in every spiritual tradition who are willing to admit that theirs is not the only way. These people will admit that the intelligence behind creation seems to work with different people in different ways and with a cultural language that fits them.
Imagine if the spiritual people, the dream keepers of the sacred, archetypal stories that arise from our collective unconscious, were to embrace one another and celebrate the ancient beauty of our various traditions. Imagine if we spiritual people held hands across the world and called for peace instead of causing religious wars, which is what we are doing right now.
If that were to happen, the people of our world might see us differently. They might see the beauty and necessity of caring for our myths and traditions. Even brother and sister scientist would celebrate our ancient stories which are, after all, our earliest attempts to understand the world around us.
Peace would be our hallmark, and we would preach that it is the birthright of everyone born on this planet. And we would be set free to pursue truth in all of its wondrous forms.
Wouldn’t that be amazing?
And maybe there would be energy and money enough to take a peek at what lies below the ice on Europa. What we find there might show us that life is bigger and broader than we ever imagined.
Sigh.
It’s crazy talk, I know. And maybe it won’t happen.
But I can’t stop thinking about it.
rlp
*Cost of War - Washington Post
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
Tags:
Cost of War
Thanks for making my day, Gordon. I've been following those little Mars Rovers since they were launched. And I do think we have our priorities screwed up. We need to work for peace instead of finding new and more effective ways of killing each other.
Happiness is my default position
Transformation...
...is inherently difficult when someone is scared of it. But there's such magic when a transformation takes place in the willing, hopeful heart. It seems to run so rapidly once we surrender to the hope it could happen.
The collective change seems more daunting to me because it requires all this political buy-in. I keep wondering whether the next revolution might be spurred from communities of people, rather than parties with platforms and ideals.
Crazy
Gordon you crazy dreamer you!
All I can say is 'I believe' and hope that in believing and dreaming we can really change the world we live in.
We're all crazy now.
It's easy to say that we
It's easy to say that we just need to be changed by the realization of a greater power, it's hard to evoke that experience in people. What you are describing though, is physical, a combination or chemical reactions, and electric signals igniting in the brain, which formulate a feeling, and a thought.
The thing is, that these negative forces, war, hatred, intolerance, they all have their root in our prgramming as well, they are part of of biology, an evolutionary survival tactic.
How do we overcome our own instincts? A much harder question to answer.
I don't suppose it will matter anyway, as the world will end in 2012.
Yikes! Just like in the
Yikes! Just like in the movie? "I am Legend" You might want to think about moving to Bereah Kentucky. I understand motels are already taking reservations.
How meaningful, then, is
How meaningful, then, is Jesus teaching on this, that to have "the life that is life" we must die to ourselves?
You can describe a feeling and many other things in this world by breaking it down into components. It's all just matter and energy. But does that truly offer a coherent explanation of everything that happens when you feel and dream and breathe? I'm not satisfied with that answser.
I don't understand what you
I don't understand what you mean? Can you write it again in other words?
If indeed "negative forces"
If indeed "negative forces" are programmed into us...anonymous asked the question of how we may overcome those insticts. I think Christ teaching on dying to ourselves is a good place to begin. (And end?)
To say that all we feel is merely a mix of electochemical events in the brain...while I don't deny that this is happening, I'm not satisfied with this as a comprehensive explanation of all we experience. Life - the whole is much greater than the sum of it's parts.
Uh, yes, there may be more
Uh, yes, there may be more going on. But science hasn't yet described it, so it cannot be taken into account in a reasoned interpretation of the universe (and more importantly in planning our actions)
It is perhaps misleading for me to have said "negative". These are survival impulses, and nature is inherently unjust (inequitable). We have "negative" impulses for survival, but it does not make them evil, nor does any inherent evil exist.
Thus RLP's dream for the world, is as equally "positive" as hitler's. Whether we accomplish some sort of utopia, or kill our own species in 2012, both are inconsequential in the universal scale of things.
I just prefer peace and honor, over strife and debauchery. There are biological reasons for this.
Darn it, they're suppose to
Darn it, they're suppose to make incandescent light bulbs out of date by then :(
RLP for President
I am putting the bumper sticker together now.
RLP FOR PRESIDENT!
You are so dead on. This is why I am exited about the emergent church. I do not agree with everything they are saying, but I believe a good bit of it. I think we are in a dawning of a global spiritual, economic and social change.
Working with the poor as I do sometimes is depressing, but I see a lot of hope, and a lot of reason for hope to continue well into the future that this generations children will not have to bear the burdens their parents did. I look forward to that day. Maybe I will be here to see it, but if not I hope God opens a window so we can watch!
it's crazy and it may never
it's crazy and it may never happen, but you can't stop thinking about it...
And that's why we love you, Gordon. You say boldly the dreams we all think only children are allowed to have. :)
Nothing wrong with
Nothing wrong with "Dreamers." I have been one for fourty-nine years. The "whether or not we should be at war" and "cooperate and work together" is (I think) the MOTHER of all dreams since the beginning of time. Keep dreaming rlp. I will too. I think if we just "go" with our dreams ("follow" our dreams sounds stupid), maybe "it" will happen. I have never thought about the ice caps of Europa. It sounds hard to reach from todays world! Thanks for offering a cup of water to this thirsty world.
Blessings Friend.
Waterman (Verified)
Speaking for the non-spiritual...
...seeing as they elected me and everything:
The alcoholic has to give up part of his very identity in order to become whole. It's a broken identity, but it's his, and he won't do intentionally give it up until the alternative is worse. Nobody wants to die, and it's a kind of death.
What part of these beloved and important traditions are the faithful willing to give up?
Is anyone willing to give up real stuff in the interest of this dream? Real, hard stuff--the stuff that's so central to the tradition that without it, you're no longer in the tradition?
Here's an example. Proselytizing.
I don't see how anyone can both proselytize and embrace plurality, except in words. Either you're convinced you've got a true message the other guy needs, or you're open to the idea that you really don't know the truth.
Here's another: Jesus died for not just your sins, but mine.
Can you give that up? Any mutually-accepting future in which people believe that one isn't really a mutually-accepting future. That one's a deal-breaker.
As I see it, the very core of each religion is as much an obstacle to harmony as you're saying the minor differences are.
The alcoholic has to accept that maybe he was wrong about nearly everything he was most certain of--and not just accept, but even embrace the idea.
Can someone devoted to a tradition--not just to a personal search for spiritual truth, but to perpetuating thousands of years of culture and tradition--give up chunks of that tradition on the off chance it might ineffably help something indefinable--and not just the chunks the believer feels might be possibly okay to give up, but those that caused them to split from whatever religions existed before theirs?
I don't think we're going to get this. I think what you can hope for is for a few bloody-minded, interested people to form new bonds and possibly cause new sparks and new directions of thought--but the mass of humanity isn't going to get smarter and doesn't much care to change anything. But they might follow new directions.
I've let this meander more than I intended, and I have to get to work instead of editing it (and probably deciding not to post it) so rather than leave people going "Huh?" I'll close it with a question. Putting aside how we achieve world peace, how do we measure movement toward the goal you've described? Is there any better way than seeing whether the amount of right action in the world increases?
If not, can we start by seeing how various religions define right action, and make that definition the place where we can begin to talk to each other? Because the traditions and stories themselves... I don't see people giving them up.
I think what many of us have
I think what many of us have to let go of, is the notion that The Bible is the final arbiter of truth for us and the world. To boldly claim, "The Bible said it, I believe it, and that settles it," is a bit disingenuous, and such thinking has been the source of much suffering throughout the centuries. For years, scripture was used to justify slavery; today Christians everywhere realize that this practice is morally reprehensible. Moral assumptions about the role of women and their proper place in the church and society have also changed as the church evolved. Leprosy was considered an outward sin of some inward sin. Those with leprosy were ostracized and removed from community. Religious law insisted on it. Child abuse is no longer tolerated by the church, although sadly, that was not always the case, “spare the rod; spoil the child" was very literally interpreted in some religious circles. The book of Exodus tells us that it was God who slew the first born of the Egyptians, and commanded genocide against the Canaanites, and yet most Christians today would say, “That is not how my God works.”
It means there are times when must reexamine scripture in light of new understanding, alongside reason and tradition, and always through the lens of Jesus’ Commandment to “Love one another.” When we do, I believe we will often be left with no other choice than to say, “Scripture is wrong in this instance.”
I believe there is wonderful truth in scripture, but not all scripture is true. No one can deny that that the Bible is full of conflicting scripture, and obscure verses that no one in their right mind would follow. The method in which it was compiled, the errors in transcription over the years, and differences in translations have also led to me to question why we place so much faith in it.
Free will... that is what
Free will... that is what Jesus gave us. The commandment to "love one another" is no differant than your mother telling you to eat you peas. How does that leave "us with no other choice than to say, scripture is wrong in this instance." Was your mother wrong to tell you to eat your peas? You may not have eaten them, but it did not make her wrong to ask it of you.
What's so funny 'bout peas, love, and understanding?
Your mother also said put babies to sleep on their stomachs, cow's milk is good for everybody, and cigarettes aren't bad for you.
Maybe Mom's being right about legumes isn't a very good reason to believe everything else she said.
I feel fairly confident that
I feel fairly confident that you relize "Free Will" was my point, not the lugumes or my mother.
Since you mentioned it, I have to say that my two sisters, my brother, myself, and my two children slept on our stomachs, we all drank milk and still do, I personally never rode my bicycle or skateboard with a helmet. I lived in a house with lead base paint until I was eighteen and then again when I was 40-45. My first two cars didn't even have seat-belts.
I still sleep on my stomach..."Free Will." (It keeps me from snoring.)
I still drink milk..."Free Will." (Because I like it!)
If I still rode a bike or a skateboard, I would wear a helmet..."Free Will." (Because I know I would end up on my head.)
I would not let lead base paint keep me from buying a house that I wanted..."Free Will."
I wear my seat-belt because it is the law in our state..."Not Free Will." (I must say that I forget to slip it on now and then.)
Actually, I'm not sure what
Actually, I'm not sure what point you're making. And maybe I didn't understand your first one, either.
Mind restating?
Again,Consider the church in
Again,Consider the church in Jerusalem. Peter was commanded by God to eat foods which were not kosher, and to associate with Gentile non-believers in Joppa. For this, Peter was brought before the council, and threatened with excommunication. This was a serious offense. Scripture had very clear guidelines about who was "in", and who was "out." Peter reasoned that God was indeed active in the lives of these non believers, as was evident by the fruits they produced. The Council at Jerusalem could easily have said "scripture forbids such behavior, stop and repent of what you are doing, or you are out." Instead, they said - "We have examined the scripture with regards to this, and we believe it is wrong." Thus,they enlarged the circle, redefined who is in and who is out, and changed their notions about who came under God's grace and mercy.
Sometimes Scripture is Wrong
When scripture is used to justify injustice, it is wrong.
Consider the following:
"After a drought of three years, Elijah presented himself to Ahab, the king of Israel, with the promise that the Lord would provide rain. Elijah then challenged 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Asherah to a contest on Mount Carmel. "Elijah came to all the people, and said, 'How long will you falter between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.' But the people answered him not a word.'" (1 Kings 18:21).
Each side made sacrifices to their God without building a fire. The lighting of the fire was to be performed by the strongest god, and would thus reveal Jehovah as the true God.
Baal was silent. Elijah mocked the prophets of Baal and said, "Cry aloud, for he is a god; either he is meditating, or he is busy, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is sleeping and must be awakened" (1 Kings 18:27). Elijah poured a large amount of water over his sacrifice and asked Jehovah to reveal Himself by consuming the sacrifice. "Then the fire of the Lord fell and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood and the stones and the dust, and it licked up the water that was in the trench" (1 Kings 18:38). When the people saw the clear victory of Jehovah, they fell on their faces and said, "The Lord, He is God! The Lord, He is God!"
Elijah then commanded the people to seize the prophets of Baal and to not let one of them escape. The prophets of Baal were then seized and "Elijah brought them down to the Brook Kishon and executed them there" (1 Kings 18:40). God then sent the rain he had promised and the drought ended (1 Kings 18:41-46)."
In light of Christ's command to love one another, can we honestly believe God was pleased with this wholesale slaughter?
When Jesus was faced with those who believed in other gods, rather than have them killed, he allowed himself to be killed by them. And then, even as they drove the nails into his hands and feet, he forgave them.
I may be reading you all
I may be reading you all wrong here, but when you say "Sometimes Scripture is Wrong," To be perfectly honest, I am a bit confused at what you are saying, because what you have written is "right."
I don't think that scripture is used to "justify injustice." Is there a lot of injustice in scripture? Yes, I believe so. Does that mean scripture is wrong? No, I don't think so. Isn't scripture history of what happened in days long ago?
In paragraphs 1 - 4 you have quoted to us some great history. Paragraph 5 is where the confusion comes in. "In light of Christs command to love one another, can we honestly believe God was pleased with this wholesale slaughter?" Well...Christ had not commanded anything yet. The old testiment scriptures you are talking about were written some eight hundred years before the birth of Christ.
In paragraph 6 you bring Jesus the Christ into the picture.
A new beginning...new history.
Can you help me out here?
I think that throughout
I think that throughout history, scripture has been used to justify all sorts of terrible behavior. I don't see how that can be denied.
Certainly, Jesus was not in the picture yet. He had issued no commandment to love one another. My argument was simply this: A God made fully known in the person of Jesus Christ could never be pleased with the wholesale slaughter of God's children, nor would God ever command such, despite of what we might read. Not if we take God's example of the cross as the lens through which we look at the rest of scripture. Can we indeed say with confidence, "This is the word of the Lord" as we read scripture from the pulpit on Sunday morning? Or might we be better off proclaiming, "This is the word of the people of God as they struggle to know God better."?
There is a very simple
There is a very simple answer to the conflict between this older scripture, and Christ's teachings. We invented god, and define him ourselves. The values of whoever wrote the scripture quoted above, were different than Christ's values, and so the stories, and indeed, the expressions of god are different.
The bible, and indeed all religion is an attempt to describe god, and godlike behavior. If you see things for what they truly are, rather than what you perceive them to be, you will be pursuing a new interpretation of the god myth. And that pursuit, the pursuit of truth, and some objective definition of good human behavior, is more important than faith, and indeed, abiding by scripture.
Wake up and give a shit
Perfect, yes!
You said it perfect. "This is the word of the people of God as we struggle to know God better."
Scripture is Wrong?
"When scripture is used to justify injustice, it is wrong."
God is so loving that John said, "God is love," meaning that if you opened Him up you'd discover the very essence of love. And Jesus certainly did command His followers to love one another. He said it this way: "They (anyone who observes your relationship - one of my followers with another of my followers) will know you're My disciples if you love one another." Jesus commanded us to love our enemies, and pray for those who use us in a wrong way. Christ-followers MUST love if they are truly His, and they buy into His teachings.
So ... with all that in mind ...
What do we do with the idea ... the Scriptural declaration ... that one day God will separate believers and unbelievers, and judge mankind. And Christ Himself - the loving Jesus who laid down His life on the Cross, like you said - talked about the reality of that judgment, and that some people would find themselves in hell ... whatever and wherever that is.
Tell you what. Let's just toss all that stuff out. The world would be a better, less complicated place. None of that sin/judgment/hell stuff fits our picture of God. Let's "re-create" Him in our image. Let's get rid of all that judgment stuff; the complex idea that you can be both loving and just, and that there is, in Christ's opinion, sin (after all, that's why He said he was going to the Cross) .... let's just get rid of it all.
Heck. Why even complicate our lives with God and Christ and the Bible anyway? If you and I can't understand it, then it must not be true ... or truth. Somebody got in there and messed up the real Bible, you know. That's it. Somebody with a grudge against mankind and God put some contradictory junk in the Bible. The best way to remain untainted by those errors is to toss it ALL out. Put it in a burn bag. Shred it. You can't trust any of it. Right?
Or maybe we just toss out the Old Testament ... 'cause that can't be talking about anything or any One having to do with the God in the New Testament. Yeah. That's it. That solves our problem. There are two Gods. A bad one - OT. And a good one - NT. Let's just believe in the NT one. That's safe.
But ... hmmm ...
Jesus gums up the works. He tell us that if we've seen Him, we've seen "the Father." He must be talking about someone other than the God of the OT. Wonder who it is?
Best bet: There's no hell. There's no sin. There was no need for the Cross. Jesus was a good man, but mistaken - tragically. It cost Him His life. The only compensation is that He's famous, and that a lot (but not all) of His teachings are being published ... and that's a good thing. And ...
We all get to go to heaven.
I like it. I can handle this kind of religion. Non-controversial. Easy to understand. No mystery. One size fits all. Let's just try to get along. Let's be civil. Let's forgive everybody like Jesus forgave those poor ignorant fools who killed Him. Let's clean up the environment, elect good governors, bring home all the soldiers ... you know. Let's just get along! Let's have some peace around here.
Whew. I'm relieved.
But ... what if I'm wrong? I mean, after all ... if Scripture can be wrong, isn't it possible that I can be wrong?
What if you CAN reconcile the God of the OT and the NT, and that they're One and the same? What if there is sin, and the Cross was necessary? What if Jesus said for His followers to love one another, and love everyone in the world like He loved everyone in the whole world? What if there aren't any contradictions in the Bible - only stuff that's over our heads and outside the framework of how we'd do things if we were God? What if you're wrong. What if Scripture isn't wrong ... just that we can't understand it all. What if there's a mysterious side of God that we can't wrap our minds around, yet? What if it all makes sense to GOD, and HE feels totally justified in having a prophet execute whomever God thinks are "false prophets?" What if it all came down to "faith" and "trust" and such?
Would any or all that complicate my life?
Yes.
Yes to pretty much
Yes to pretty much everything you have said. I love the Word of God. I believe "all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness..." At the same time, as I have said, I believe it was written by man in an attempt to understand God. Why do we have the Canon of Scripture that we have? Who got to decide what was in, and what was out? What rules were used to decide? Antiquity? Apostolic authorship? If that is the case, we know now that much of what was included was included erroneously.
I believe scripture must always be tested alongside reason, revelation and tradition. Jesus cautioned us to be aware of false prophets. To look for tares among the wheat. Is it not possible that there might be tares among the scripture? Should we not test scripture to see that it is indeed from God?
What do we do with hell, sin, the cross? What do we do with passages of scripture that speak of God's judgement?
What do we do with the trinity, virgin birth, substitutionary atonement...
The only thing I can fall back on is God's extravagant grace and the fact that God's kingdom is big enough for me...
Read the following
Read the following scriptures and then talk to me about following the Bible literally. Lev. 20:16, Deut. 28:53, Deut. 21:18-21, and Psalm 137:9.
And how about 2 Kings 18:27, and Ezek. 23:20 for obscure and absurd?
Well, my intent was to
Well, my intent was to certainly that we give up proselytizing. I think we've moving in that direction. You know, a few hundred years ago, Christians regularly put each other to death, torturous death, over theological issues. We don't anymore. I'm not aware of any significant group of Christians on the planet that does. Not that we can't still be arrogant pricks on a regular basis. And that stuff still takes place with other religions and in other contexts. But the point is, progress is made.
Ironically, I'm pretty cynical too. That's why I mentioned carefully that I decided to write this whether or not if comes true in my lifetime.
It's just a dream. And while I can state the dream, I certainly can't be responsible, actually or emotionally, for whether or not others follow. So this is the dream. What we do with it will be seen. Whether or not others share it will be seen.
Yeah, I didn't mean to
Yeah, I didn't mean to criticize. I get that.
My entire existence has been based on turning admittedly much smaller dreams than "world peace" into ways to make them happen, so I can't just let it go at "that's a great dream." I'll turn blue.
Discouraged
Sometimes I get discouraged. My wife and I counsel with "Christian" married couples in crisis. On a very basic level we are dealing with the exact same issues you discuss here.
How many ways can you present to a man that his ways will end in destruction? That his ways are not God's ways. How many ways can you encourage one to positive change? If a man is un-motivated, what will cause him to be motivated? What will make him see that doing the same damaging things over and over again will not bring about fruitful results? How do you help a man to see the value in relationships if he naturally doesn't? What helps a man to become self-aware, introspective, interested in life, willing to break out of a rut and get creative, engaged and alive? What will encourage a man to humbleness of heart and gentleness of spirit?
No answers yet....
Bless you
Thanks once again Gordon for a wonderful essay. A friend said that Camus concluded that we must imagine that Sisyphys was happy. What could be better than helping your fellow travellers, over and over and over again? (Also thanks it is nice to read something positive about scientists.)
I don't know how the heck
I don't know how the heck you do it. I work at a homeless shelter/substance abuse facility in probably the worst part of what I call the GR-CRC mecca of the world. Here we have people trying to get clean from a life-long history or the most horrific abuse imaginable. I care for them deeply but I also see a very dark side that baffles me.
Even within a Christian community that professes the faith I watch these people destroy one another and the underlying motives are jealousy, hatred, hurt and vindictiveness.
I keep dreaming and I keep on believing but we have our hands full. I like challenges though.
get on dreaming. It has to start somewhere.
becky
"You may say I'm a Dreamer
"You may say I'm a Dreamer but I'm not the only one,
I hope someday you'll join us,
And the World will live as One."
Hmmmmm.
Let's all Dream On.
From "Imagine" by John
From "Imagine" by John Lennon. You know, Lennon once noted that they (The Beatles) where more popular than Jesus.
Hmmmmm...I don't know about that...but dream on!
Peace
The Sparrow
Listening to this essay (nice to put a voice with the face and name, btw), your missives on space exploration and wonder reminded me strongly of a book I love called The Sparrow.
In 2019, humanity finally finds proof of extraterrestrial life when a listening post in Puerto Rico picks up exquisite singing from a planet which will come to be known as Rakhat. While United Nations diplomats endlessly debate a possible first contact mission, the Society of Jesus quietly organises an eight-person scientific expedition of its own. What the Jesuits find is a world so beyond comprehension that it will lead them to question the meaning of being "human." When the lone survivor of the expedition, Emilio Sandoz, returns to Earth in 2059, he will try to explain what went wrong... Words like "provocative" and "compelling" will come to mind as you read this shocking novel about first contact with a race that creates music akin to both poetry and prayer.
It is beautifully written, and explores topics of faith and trauma in a very authentic way.
I loved that book. I
I loved that book. I remember hurrying from lamppost to lamppost so I could keep reading it.
I cant stop thinking about
I cant stop thinking about it either RLP. I also keep thinking that if Jesus was walking around on Earth right now, he wouldn't be a "Christian". I can't see it. I have always thought that Jesus was the first to get it right in his region. He captured the essence of God , therefore he was God. We needed a daddy and we still do. He was the Son of God. He became the sacrificial lamb for our sins because that was the cultural context of his day. It took me years to unravel this literary language from the literalness (is that a word?)of my religious upbringing. Right now as I sit here in type I feel a little like SATAN'S little helper but this is me and this what I see. I think we all just have different capacities and comfort levels as far as what religious notions we can drop or what we can integrate. Can some of us wrap our arms around a Buddhist, give him a big squeeze, chuckle and know he is not going to hell? Some of you cant. Some of you can. RLP I sense a quiet revolution too. I think there will be some of us that will venture onto those slippery slopes you speak of. We'll have kids and let them do the same. This is how it begins and we'll just slide on down. Didnt Jesus do the same? He dared to present truth and love in dark Old Testament world. He brought God to us and it took people's breath away. The Gospel transforms peoples lives and so do other teachings in other worlds. We must die first, the self must die and we will then have everlasting life because we are connected-One. No matter where you live, no matter what your religious context, God is omnipotent. To think otherwise is undermining God isn't it? On another note RLP, maybe you can help me with this.....CS Lewis in Mere Christianity argues (Im paraphrasing big time) 'you cant say, Jesus was just a great teacher because lets face it, what great teacher runs around saying they are God. It would be foolish to respect that kind of man's teaching. You can't have it both ways'. I acknowledge this but still think, could Jesus have been not saying he was literally the way or that he was God?. Is it possible that he was speaking in sort of Eastern terms and it was interpreted in the context of the day. Was his message so different that we are reading the way ancient people wrapped their heads around it? Furthermore Is God going to strike me down for posting this? Seriously you don't know how hard it is for this fundamentalist raised southern kid to be saying this. My heart just gives me this sort of burden of including all truths. I always think it terms of "yes but how true" . It hurts my faith sometimes and makes me dizzy with possibilities. But because I have not abandoned these doubts, these skeptic thoughts about my own tradition, I have learned to integrate. It makes me a religious schizophrenic I know. I just can't help it, I see a common thread in world religion, that is turning more and more into a rope. I used to worry how I can raise my kids in the Christian tradition yet have these thoughts. That is an intellectual question though. The more I hold onto that rope the more steady I feel and ironically the less answers I have. Yay for faith. Grab your Bibles or your Korans and just grab on. We are all in this together, AMEN.
"From now on, we live in a
"From now on, we live in a world where man has walked on the moon. And it's not a miracle. We just decided to go." - Tom Hanks, "Apollo 13"
Anyone know if that's an actual Jim Lovell quote?
Creating True Peace
I've recently read a couple of books I think you might enjoy.
They are by a friend of Martin Luther King Jnr and also of Thomas Merton, the Vietnamese Buddhist monk and peace activist, Thich Nhat Hahn.
The first is 'Creating True Peace - Ending conflict in yourself, your family, your community and the world'.
The second is 'Living Buddha, Living Christ', which respectfully explores the similarities between the essential teachings of Buddhism and the essential teachings of Christ rather than looking at the less helpful religious practices that have been developed by those who call themselves followers of Buddha or Christ.
I found just reading them made me feel very calm and peaceful, but if more people put Thich Nhat Hanh's ideas into practice the world would certainly be a better and more peaceful place.
Coming to this late since I
Coming to this late since I got left behind when the feed address changed and only now realized.
Space exploration is an excellent dream, and one being advanced creatively by The Stardance Project which is working to make an IMAX movie of a zero-gravity dance performance. They're in the early stages, but their very brief test footage created recently on a commercial "vomit comet" style parabolic airplane flight gives a taste of what it might become. This is the kind of thing that can make that transformation happen.
Change Begins with a Dream
Sorry that I had to!
No hard feelings!
New impotence medicine purchase buy for some men sexual health packages order cheap cialis system drugstore herbal medicine impotence suppliers buy online approved drug drugstore success here's Viagra Cialis sexual health for buy cheap drugs free delivery this online pharmacy health club buy cheap viagra top good Viagra your here's Viagra prices drugstore metabolism disorders cause order drugs online local pharmacy order viagra health professionals think order viagra provider buy generic Viagra suppliers order customer support is order cheap cialis for women buy Viagra online online pharmacy impotence dose this online pharmacy you buy drugs which here's Viagra sildenafil citrate buy VIAGRA worldwide. this online pharmacy treat order Viagra online medicine industry buy Cialis & Viagra drug good Viagra doctors say buy online healthy viagra pills take online pharmacy food energy here's Viagra cheap good Viagra exercise sexual enhancement take the pills impotence company sexual enhancement risky order Viagra online medical advice buy CIALIS read about drugstore TV order viagra the internet buy viagra and cialis university researches have shown buy viagra and cialis able to buy cialis with no prescription reviews order Cialis online pill review buy generic Cialis search engines buy viagra education buy viagra impotent people cheap Viagra is buy Cialis cheap buy cialis with no prescription good buy online what order cheap cialis pills low-price Viagra.