Religion is a Conversation between God and Me

April 4, 2018 Open Religion No Comments

In the course of time, many have been killed for daring to say so. Many who have been killed for it, have found it worthwhile nevertheless.

God and me

We can take, for the sake of this text at least, a very broad view on the notion of ‘God’. It can be the one (or many) of any specific religion. It can be an abstract thought, a force of nature or a personal concoction. Anything goes. Otherwise this text has no meaning whatsoever to you, dear reader.

And the notion of ‘me’? Well, we need to take a broad view on that also. Not in the sense that it can be anything, but that it’s about ‘me’-totally: in all my conscious mental processing and my non-conscious mental processing.

Are you ready?

Religion is a conversation.

I talk to Him. He talks to me. I can be alone or with many people. If words are involved, they tend to be poetic. In many cases, they’re not needed. Animals don’t talk, yet converse. People, even while talking, converse also in many other ways. That’s okay. Why would He need words anyway? So, when I don’t need them, everything’s perfect.

But conversation there is!

Which means more – as things frequently do – than may be obvious at first sight. The main deeper meaning to me:

There is no religion without conversation.

This is probably even more to the core of the killing I already mentioned. ‘No religion without conversation’ puts responsibility right into the heart of the ones who converse.

God? No problem.

Me? Wow!

If I do not converse with God, there is no religion.

I can converse with God all the time, so there can always be religion.

It’s directly between God and me. Consequence:

no need for any priest in-between.

No pope in-between. No imam. No guru. No shaman. No-one.

No book in-between. No building. No sermon. No fairytales, nor any other tales. No-thing.

No situations in-between. No mores. No traditions. No cutting. No shoe. No veil. Not any kind of clothing.

Nothing.

Thus, also no means of keeping people under any authority’s iron fist. The ‘conversation’ from the title takes away all iron power of any authority.

Authority needs to find something else. I suggest: Open Leadership. Of course, this isn’t as easy as just ramming along. It demands a lot of work, insight, humility…

Can the title’s conversation be called ‘mysticism’?

Sure: a very normal mysticism of every normal day.

Of course, people may need support

especially when in Divine conversation. For instance, doesn’t the Catholic bible say that “thou shall not look God in the face and live”?

An iron fist, however, is no support at all. Meaning: when people need it maybe most in their entire lives, many ‘religious authorities’ have in the course of time delivered an unfortunate abuse instead.

What can I say? I guess they don’t know what they’re doing.

This should stop, not simply for the sake of ‘getting rid of religion’ but precisely for the sake of the conversation that lies at the core of true religion. As said: no religion without it. Moreover, people cannot be enforced in this. It can only ‘grow from deep inside’. If a priest, imam, brother, parent… or even oneself tries to enforce someone in anything towards this conversation, he is doing the opposite.

That’s what I would call ‘sacrilegious’. It’s completely anti-religious.

One example: enforcing any girl (or boy) to wear a veil ‘for God’s sake’.

This does not mean they should not weir a veil. It doesn’t mean they should. It does mean that it’s completely beside the godly issue. If it doesn’t emerge from deeply within that boy himself (or girl), there is no true conversation and no religion.

I may have felt this only once in my life. Gone was God.

So tell me: how can an emerging ever happen under a fist of coercing? I don’t see that at all.

In conversation, I’ve asked ‘God’ about it. No answer, as usual with senseless questions.

I totally agree.

 

Please follow and like us:
LinkedIn
Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
RSS
Follow by Email
SHARE

Related Posts

Words Like ‘Soul’ Are Not the Exclusive Right of Religion

Not of any specific religion, nor of ‘religion’ in general. It is therefore high time for a kind of ‘science of the deeper self’ that distinguishes itself from ‘religion’ in the sense that it is not based on a dogma or a story. You can compare it with astronomy that has emancipated from astrology +/- Read the full article…

Science = Re-ligion

Science is frequently seen as partly or even completely opposite to religion. In the sense of re-ligion however, things get reversed. Science is the quest to know the universe as it is and not as someone of a few centuries or even millennia ago has imagined it. Back then, almost nothing was known on many Read the full article…

Humanism with a Vengeance

Humanism: ‘man is the measure of all things.’ Vengeance: this is about the total human being – partly conscious, mostly nonconscious. Many faces of humanism, yesterday and today Among them, I see ‘humanism’ as what puts human being at the forefront, thus not – apart from human being – any organization: no religion, no politics, Read the full article…