God's Not What You Think

This is the fourth part of the credo project.  Some of the material in this post has been posted previously as separte items. 

I begin again with my Statement of Beliefs – some of which has evolved since the first paper:

• I believe that there is only one Power and Presence and that that Power and Presence is life-affirming.
• I believe that I and all living things are holograms of that Power and Presence – one point in that Presence that contains the entirety of that Presence.
• I believe that “all that exists and beyond all that exists” is that Presence – connected substance – simultaneous energy points and at the same time unique manifestations.
• I believe that how I think and what I think configure the out forming of that Presence, manifesting physically as the energy that is consciousness moves through that point that is “me.”
• I believe that how and what I think create the conscious experience called “feelings” as specific “things”, for “feelings” are energy without charge or meaning until I “think” a label, name, meaning.
• I believe that consciousness evolves – in individuals and in collectives.
• I believe that when my thoughts, feelings and actions come from a limited consciousness, I create the perception of a less than whole life. 
• I believe that regular and conscious use of prayer, meditation, and directed thought can increase my awareness of wholeness/oneness and bring me and my “world” into alignment with that One Power and Presence.
• I believe that my purpose in this lifetime is to consciously experience the oneness in all points of energy as I come in contact with them and through every manifestation of my thoughts and feelings.

And now more commentary:

This fourth part of the credo is to address humankind’s relationship with God – what is an individual’s part in that relationship; what stands in the way of that relationship; can anything restore a broken relationship.

This discussion draws heavily on the beliefs outlined in part III – the nature of God. 

First, as stated in my Statement of Beliefs, I believe that I, and all living beings, are points of manifested energy in the soup of Universal Being.  Because of this, my relationship with that Universal Being is both organic and symbiotic.  One cannot exist in this dimension without the other.  I am brought forth from that Beingness/Source and I then find that I must define that Beingness/Source in terms relevant to my level of consciousness and understanding in order to create relationship.  As my consciousness evolves, my understanding and vision of that Source also evolves. 

I do believe that in each level of consciousness evolution, we manifested points of energy must create an image or images of Source/God that will allow us to address the questions of ‘who am I?’, ‘what am I?’, and ‘why am I here?” I believe that today we have present on the planet a wider range of “consciousnesses”  than at any other time in our history.  As a result, we as a species are holding a wider array of these ‘images of God/Source’ than at any other time in our past.  Using the Spiral Dynamics model of consciousness evolution  as the framework in which to review these various images, we find in our world elements of the Egocentric Red God – Power god – warrior – concerned only with “his” own people – a god that is guiltless of wrongdoing.   We find the Mythic Blue God – separate and apart from humans – ethnocentric – a god of law – patriarchal.  We find the Scientific Orange God – universal – humanist – giant within waiting to be empowered – requiring no dogma – embracing materialism and pragmatism.   We find the Sensitive Green God – both masculine and feminine – relativistic – god of the downtrodden – honors multiple mystical paths – against war unless for righteous cause.  And we have emerging the Integrative Yellow God – universal – god of systems, integration and paradox – manifests “godself” through evolutionary process – fosters the ‘magnificence of existence’ – god of all religions and peoples.  I believe that from each of these different images will come different relationships between God/Source and humankind, individually and collectively.  In addition to this framework of consciousness evolution, I believe that we must also look at the three aspects or faces of God/Source that our human nature reaches out for as we move into the creation process.   According to both ancient and modern philosophers and pundits, the three perspectives or faces of God are as follows:    “I” – God in 1st person: the true Self, Christ-nature, the eternal “I am”, interior, Intersubjective.

“Thou” – God in 2nd person: the almighty Other, the Savior, the ego-humbling Divine, exterior, Objective.

“It” – God in 3rd person: the Kosmic evolutionary process, the Web of Life, transcendent, Subjective.Based on my own limited reading and study, I have come to believe that for individuals operating at certain levels of consciousness mentioned above, one or more of the three faces/aspect of God/Source may not be accessible and this inaccessibility plays a significant role in the defining of God and our relationship to God.When an individual or group is operating from within the Red and Blue perspectives, I believe that the 1^st and 3^rd persons/faces of God are generally overwhelmed by the 2^nd person – the exterior Almighty Other.  In the case of the Red consciousness, this might manifest as the political/warrior leader seen as God, e.g., Caesar as God.  In the Blue consciousness, God, i.e., Jehovah, Allah, Jesus as God/Man, is defined as separate, anthropomorphic, omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient.  These Blue Gods appear to be defined within cultures and each one is seen as the true God by its own believers/followers to the exclusion of the others.  I believe that these Red and Blue images of God leave very little room for a Christ Self within the individual nor do they allow for an Oneness Creator, transcendent Web.   This is not to say that individuals operating within a Red or Blue consciousness can not find all three faces/aspect.  I just believe that it is very difficult.Interestingly, as consciousness evolves to Orange and Green levels of consciousness, the 1^st and 3^rd faces/aspect seems to take on a much more prominent role almost in reaction to the very strong 2^nd person face/aspect that is defined in Red and Blue.  That strong 2^nd person view appears to be pushed to the background or dropped almost completely in favor of that personal, internal Higher Self, Christ Self of the 1^st person and the emergence of a more transcendent Presence that is seen as the Oneness of all religious faith traditions, with their various rituals and creeds.  I believe that the evolution to the Yellow tier of consciousness brings with it a more balanced approach to all three faces/aspects of God/Source.  From this perspective of integration and allowed paradox, one can recognize that each face/aspect exists inclusive of the other, not exclusively.  With each of these shifts in consciousness and perspectives/definitions of God/Source, the relationship between God and Humankind will also change.  When God/Source is defined anthropomorphically as with the Red and Blue gods, our relationship with that God most often takes on the characteristics of political and/or familial relationships such as Caesar as God, God as Father.  We become followers, children, siblings with all the attendant restrictions, responsibilities and dysfunctions.  In those relationships, we are called on to obey the rules, ask for permission/forgiveness, to not talk back.  Punishment is meted out for the wayward.  Rewards are giving to the good.   The sciences and God are often viewed as antagonistic at best and mortal enemies at worst.In these relationships, the individual is considered less than the leader, the father, the favored son – not unloved or uncared for, just not the same.  Each of these relationships when built on eternal principles of Love, Peace, Justice, Compassion, Joy and Abundance can be powerful and fulfilling and, ultimately, I believe will lead to evolution to a higher consciousness of God.   When built on limited understanding of those principles and limited world view, these relationships can be damaging and unhealthy.  When God/Source loses its anthropomorphic character and is defined as universal principle, Divine Mind, Pure Essence as occurs in the Orange and Green levels of consciousness, I believe the relationship with humankind shifts to that of partner, co-creator.  This shift emphasizes connectivity, oneness, inclusivity.   I believe that this shift brings about a greater emphasis on personal introspection and growth.   Individual definition of “right and wrong” rather than guidelines/law handed down from one source set the framework for ethical or “right” living.  God becomes a barometer against we can measure and evaluate our thoughts and actions rather than the arbiter, judge and enforcer of us as thinkers and doers.  And even at this level, there is a sense of being not completely one with that Source.  Using the “To me, By me, Through me, As me” model, the Orange and Green levels of consciousness might best be described as “Through me” thinking, as the Red and Blue levels would be the “To me and By me” thinking.  I believe that most of us are working in the Blue/Orange/Green levels of consciousness. Having said all that, I also believe that that which blocks our relationship with God/Source, however it is defined, is the finite view that comes with a world of duality and our acceptance of it as the only view.  At each level of consciousness, we have within us the capacity to move through states of consciousness:

1. gross-waking states
2. subtle-dreams states, e.g., vivid daydreams, visualization, certain types of meditation
3. causal-formless states, e.g., deep dreamless sleep and yoga, meditation
4. witnessing states, i.e., the capacity to witness all of the other states
5. ever-present nondual awareness, i.e., the ever-present ground of all states – oneness

These states and the tools used to achieve them may be called by different names at different levels.  And yet, if an individual truly seeks the pure knowing of God, the experience of nondual awareness can be the same.  Mystics of all ages and all traditions describe that singular space of oneness – the metaphors and language used are cultural; the experience is transcendent.   When the relationship between God/Source and an individual, me, is “broken,” it is not God that breaks it.  The break comes from me, the individual, as I close down or narrow the scope of myself – whether I close down or narrow my mind or my heart.  In either case, I have put up a barrier around my point of energy, blocking out the flow of energy to and from all other points of energy.  I put my self in a ‘non-real’ situation – an isolation chamber – and from that disconnect comes the energy that we label fear.  Without that connected flow, I begin to act as sole creator and the “material” with which I create is only a shadow, an illusion.  If I do not reconnect – remove the barrier – I will find myself scrambling within a very narrow space to shore up my creation and the ‘material’ I use will ultimately wear out because there is no renewal and replacement.  In the Red and Blue world, I would call this sin and because I am less than God, I am told that I can not repair the break myself.  There must be a redemptive act, a sacrifice, which I surrender myself to in order to re-establish the connection.  In the Orange and Green world, I would call this error or mistake.  To re-establish the connection, I would turn inward to identify the choices/events/thoughts that led to the error and correct them.  This is not as easy as it sounds since so much of my thought and choices happen in a subconscious mode.  While there is no redemptive act or sacrifice, there is often the need to surrender to the other than conscious part of my self to shift the pattern back to connection.  In the Yellow world, I’m not sure what I would call this – maybe just a break.  My sense is that the “corrective” action is more one of objective observation and identification and acceptance of the potentiality that the action opened up.  I like to think that, at times, I find myself in the Yellow level.  When I sense that I’m there, I do realize that I don’t have the words and metaphors for it yet.And while I learn and integrate the language of that Yellow level, I will continue to use the words, the metaphors, the images that I know: prayer, meditation, denials, affirmations – the tools that release the fear, the pride, the ego and re-connect me with the constant flow of God; the energy pattern established by the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth living as the Christ on earth into which I can stand and raise my own vibration.  As a minister, I know that I will encounter and serve individuals who are walking in each one of these levels of consciousness and it is important that I recognize where each individual is on this journey and find the words, metaphors and images with which they can relate.