God & Heaven & Sin, Etc.

Only Donald Trump would try to start a pissing match with the pope. When the pope weighed in on Iran with some Just War Theory, Trump didn't just say that he respectfully disagreed, but instead went into his whole insult routine, since anyone who disagrees with him is by definition a bad and stupid person. But that's not what I want to talk about. What I want to talk about is how some religious people thought the behavior wasn't just rude, but especially offensive because the pope is "godly" and in close relation with the Man Upstairs. So for that reason a clear sinner like Trump shouldn't presume to debate or challenge the pope like he did. The implication was that the pope was more of a Man of God than The Donald, so he should just shut up. But here's the thing, I wish Trump would shut up too, and he is rude and boorish and egotistical, but ... but, granting for the purposes of argument that "God" exists, Trump stands in the exact same relationship with God as the Pope does: the exact same "distance," and with the, how shall we put this, the exact same "approval rating" as the pontiff. Each human is of the same spiritual substance, behavior and beliefs aside.

Be that as it may, if God actually did employ some sort of spiritual rating system, one could argue that the pope would not necessarily be at the top. After all, he's a guy who played by the rules within an institution, which sort of limits the breadth of one's perception of the world. For example, as noble as the Church's ideals may be, it's just wrong that anyone in this world needs "saving." And, we would also have to guess that the required obedience might limit one's personal development. Coloring within the lines is an intermediate step toward full expression or actualization. Now, Trump is a rule breaker, but does so in an unenlightened way -- in a pre- rather than post-conventional manner. Let's consider an example of breaking the "rules" that might serve as an unlikely source of merit. Let's say that a believer and a principled atheist of the humanist sort arrive to meet their maker in the afterlife. Here, the believer thinks to himself, now is where I get my reward and the other guy receives an unfortunate surprise. Well, there is a surprise all right, when God says to the atheist, obviously you were wrong about me and heaven and all that, but I like your spunk. You took a principled stand and tried to build a better world in the ways that felt right to you. Well played, sir! Come on in. There's a whole wing of heaven for people like you. Which leaves the believer sputtering but ... but ....

But wasn't there supposed to be punishment for the unbeliever? Sure, yes, that is what is proposed by traditional believers. But this presents God as a jerk, sadistic even, only happy if his "children" do what he says with no deviation. This parent isn't delighted by the creative modes of existence that the child has trail-blazed. The child he created, by the way! I know, I know. Adam and Eve committed the Original Sin, which then tainted each and every human to come. I think St. Augustine was responsible for this absurdity. Even brilliant guys like him can be wrong. It was a neat trick, coming up with a semi-plausible answer for why God would want to punish every damn person on the planet. On the other hand, a reasonable God (and is it too much to expect God to be reasonable?) would be like, "Oh shit, my plan for the Garden of Eden didn't work out. It actually, I must admit, was ill-conceived on my part to begin with. Let's go to Plan B, where I'll do my best to make humanity thrive in this new world of separation and duality and insecurity. I'm there for you guys! Ask and ye shall receive. Oh, and if people seek meaning through a different faith tradition or philosophy, more power to 'em!"

The weirdest thing to me is that in the traditional Christian schema, normal human behavior is labeled as sin, an offense against God. A while ago, Franklin Graham, Billy's son, did blanket advertising during the evening news. In his ad, he invited everyone to join him in prayer, the gist of which was that the had sinned against God and needed forgiveness, which is only available when one converts to the Christian path. But what are his sins? He doesn't say. Telling a lie or half-truth? Cheating on your spouse? Not owning up to mistakes you have made that may have hurt others? Welcome to the human life! Now these things aren't "good" by any objective measure, but they don't piss God off, okay? And they don't leave you tainted, requiring something beyond your capacities to rectify. But if left unaddressed such behaviors can hurt others and leave you not only in a world of static and confusion but also leave you unable to harmoniously grow to your full potential. And that's why we are here: To learn and to grow and to help others do the same. And if God or any deity or spirit beings exist, they are here to assist this task.

So where is heaven and what is it like? Well, Jesus said that the Kingdom of God is within you. This is an observation that, in my view, doesn't get enough play in Christian quarters, or actually across the world. This is what Emerson was getting at when he said "I will trust that what is deep is holy." He made this declaration as he was separating himself from the Christian Unitarian Church of New England in the early 1800s. He was rejecting the idea that if you seek a meaningful and guiding interior life without the guidance of the church you will encounter devils who will mislead you there. But if we reject Emerson's position and refuse to trust ourselves, we find ourselves susceptible to various forms of authoritarianism, which is a big problem here on this earthly plane. But don't sociopaths "trust" themselves? Well, yes, but they are operating at the most superficial level of life. Their lack of introspection and their inability or lack or desire to see through the eyes of others leave them stunted. Certainly, they are producing karma of the worst sort, which they will have to deal with. 

Ultimately, when it comes to heaven or The Other Side, we can say two things: that it is continuous or even simultaneous with present reality, and that change is the rule there just as it is here. Heaven doesn't need to wait, because it's already and always here. On earth as in heaven, right? Maybe heaven is where you point your consciousness. That said, upon death, I think all of us will get a lot smarter about things, pronto. Plus once over there, one's growth continues. As I put it in a poem of mine, "No die is eternal cast, even after death." So your skills you are working on here about growth and harmony and the rest are the same skills you will use there. But in a deeper and more universal and multidimensional way. Oh, one more thing. Heaven doesn't require a hell in order to exist. That's one duality that is an illusion.