hi everyone,
just thought some of you may be interested in this sermon that was emailed to me, which includes references to Chopra and the notion that God is All, and that develops various other 'non-traditional' strands of thought, from a slightly different perspective than perhaps many of you are used to. It's worth noting too, his call for a 'new kind of faith'.



Unitheism-Sermon on
HOW TO ACCESS GOD'S WEB PAGES
Or
ACCESSING GOD'S INTERNET
by Lindsay G. King ( http://www.flfcanada.com )

The following sermon was first preached, in written form, to members of my discussion forum at http://www.theboomer.com



The idea for this sermon came to me as a result of my experience with a group of people with whom I keep in touch on the Web. I am writing and part of a discussion forum hosted by Jonathan Chevreau, publisher of Wealthyboomer Magazine. Jon also writes for the National Post. The forum is about Wealth, Wisdom and Well Being. The Wisdom section also has a spiritual sub-section.
The theme of the sermon came to me early one morning about 1:30 AM. In my thread I wrote a brief note: “As I am getting a little sleepy at this point, I think I will just go to bed and dream on on the theme. I need to find some material that will help me develop it. I will look for it tomorrow.

FINDING THE NEEDLE IN THE HAYSTACK:
The next morning, led, I believe, by the SPIRIT, I started sifting through a bunch of papers that I recently found and that I had not filed in any particular order. Among the papers, there was a sermon by the Rev. Ernest Holmes. It was entitled: THE UNIVERSE IS YOURS. I had clipped it from the SCIENCE OF MIND magazine, July 1977.
Also my attention was drawn to the recent book I purchased that had been recommended by JC—that is Jon Chevreau—not Jesus. By the way, Jon is an active Anglican layman and obviously is spiritual in inclination.

With these two items I started to read, meditate and make notes.
Much of what Holmes says in his message fits in, exactly, with the points that I am trying to make in my sermon on HOW to access GOD'S Web Pages.

Consider the first sentence: “The storehouse of nature is filled with infinite good, waiting the touch of our awakened thought to spring forth into manifestation for us, but the awakening must be on our part and not on the side of Life. We stand at the gateway of limitless opportunity in the eternal and changeless now.“
Here he seems to be saying that life is quite neutral. It is like a machine, an electric light, or a computer. It will just lie there and do nothing unless we turn it on and use it.

However, he goes on to point out that once we get involved, when we get in harmony with the Spirit of the universe—the creative power of GOD—there is nothing that can hinder our advancement, physically, mentally and spiritually, now, or in the future.

BUT, he also goes on to point out that this SPIRITUAL POWER—the power of the universe—is a two-edged sword. Unconsciously it is pure power. The power of the universe can destroy as well as create. The sun will give you a suntan or sunstroke. The natural world—and this includes the natural laws that govern it—is totally impersonal. Freezing temperatures don't care whether they give you frost bite, or make you ice cream.

However, when touched by consciousness, this power, this knowledge, and this eternal presence, whatever, becomes constructively creative. It can also be destructive. It seems to me that what Holmes is saying is this: For good or ill, LIFE IS AN INSIDE JOB.

Isn't this the message of the Gospel? Didn't Jesus say, “The Kingdom of GOD is within us“? He frequently spoke of good and evil as originating within the human heart. So the Kingdom of the Devil is within us too.
I'm reminded of the old Flip Wilson skit about the minister's wife whose taste for dresses were too extravagant for her husband's pay. I am not talking about Jean King here; I am talking about Jean Gertridge. Just kidding!
Anyway, one day she came home with a dress and modeled it for her husband. Noticing the price tag, her frugal husband asked: “Now, now, dear! I have to admit that you do look lovely in the dress, but you know we can't afford. Why did you spend all this money?“
“I was tempted by the devil! The devil, he done made me do it! Nasty old devil. It's all his fault.“
Well now, I've told you what the Bible says we have to say to the devil when he tempts us. Don't you remember? “
“Yes, dear, I do. You told me that I was to quote the words of Jesus: “Get thee behind me…“
Well?
I did exactly what you said. I just told that old Satan devil: Get thee behind me…you old Satan, you!
And?
He did exactly what I asked. I must say he was very obedient. Quite the gentleman, really.
Then what happened?
He spoke to me.
He did? What did he say?
He said: “It looks lovely on you from behind!“
The point is obvious.
But seriously, over and over again, Jesus speaks of being at one with GOD. “I and my father are one“. This was such a heresy to those who heard him say this, two thousand years ago, that they were prepared to stone him to death for blasphemy. Imagine!
Regardless, it became one of Jesus' constant themes.

In the very last prayer Jesus uttered on earth are the oft quoted words: THAT ALL MAY BE ONE—the very motto of the United Church of Canada. At around 30 AD, he spoke of being one with his disciples, one with the people, one with GOD, and even one with us who are living two thousand year later. Read it. It is there is black and white.
The Gospels tell us that just before Jesus came to Nazareth—where, by the way, he preached his first sermon before he set off on his ministry—he spent 40 days in the wilderness, near Jerusalem [My wife and I visited the in 1975.]
There, in the desert, the Bible says, he was tempted, by the devil. At that point, metaphorically speaking, he and the devil were one. This is the same as saying that he became consciously aware of the great power of evil.

Of course had he accepted the temptations of the devil, he and the devil would have remained one. But he rejected the spirit of evil, consciously. Then, using the same power of consciousness, he chose to access the GOD power—the power of love, the supreme source of all good.
This brings us to the formula for doing this. To make it easy to remember, I use the acronym
Honest
Open
Willing
This poses the important question: How can we be open and be willing?
This brings me to the second needle, in the form of book, that I found in the haystack. Jon Chevreau introduced me to it.

The book is entitled, How to know GOD—the Soul's Journey into the Mystery of Mysteries, by Deepak Chopra. He is a Western trained endocrinologist.

Although he doesn't use the word, Dr. Chopra's book is about what I call unitheism. And Unitheism is about seeing GOD, not as a being who exists like an idol, apart and separate from us, but more like Jesus saw GOD—as being itself, of which each and all of us is a part. In this sense of the word, we are all sons and daughters of GOD.

Interestingly, Chopra has a note about God and the gender problem. He admits: “Finding a pronoun for God is not easy.“ He goes on to say that because God transcends all gender. “I could have rotated three different pronouns—he, she, and it.“ For easy reading he reverts to the common tradition and uses he. (Page 3).

May I suggest further: that scientists, such as pneumatologists (students of the spirit), when researching the Mysteries of GOD, could use the pronoun IT. I feel certain that GOD is humble enough not to mind it at all. It could be the theological IT—not unlike the editorial, or royal WE.

Deepak Chopra is, I believe, a unitheist.
And he is not the only one. The theologian, Paul Tillich, he taught at Union Seminary in New York, in the 60's and 70's, the retired Episcopalian Bishop, John Shelby Spong, the psychiatrist and writer, Scott Peck, the former Dominican priest Matthew Fox, to name a few, express similar views.

On page 14 of his book Chopra writes: “God, it turns out, isn't a person; God is a process. Your brain is hardwired to find God. Until you do you will not know who you are.“ WONDERFUL STUFF!
On page 16 he writes: “God is another name for infinite intelligence. To achieve anything in this life, a piece of this intelligence must be contacted and used. In other words, God is always there for you.“
This is another way of saying that it is possible to access GOD“S Web Pages.

To repeat myself, long before I ever read Chopra, I was saying things like: “GOD is not a being apart from you and me. But rather, GOD is all BEING, in, through and beyond all physical being. GOD is that of which you and I are A part.“
So, to access GOD'S Pages we have to begin, as Jesus did, with the self, the human spirit.
This means that it is absolutely impossible to access GOD'S Web Pages without being absolutely and brutally honest with oneself.
“Polonious“ the father of Laertes, in Shakespeare's Hamlet, puts it so well, “This above all to thine own self be true…“
Let's use the language of the computer age:
There is a saying familiar to all people who use computers—“Garbage in garbage out—GIGO.“ We human beings—human nature being what it is—can sometime fool ourselves. However, we cannot fool GOD—the infallible, know-it-all, the all-powerful yet—in some mysterious way—the all loving.
Talking to the GOD within is like talking to a loving earthly father and mother.
If you were lucky enough to have loving parents, parents who really knew you, did you ever try to lie to them?
Didn't work, did it?
It's like trying to lie to a loving spouse.
Did you hear about the person who was asked: “Do you believe in lie detectors?“
He answered, “Of course I do! I married one.
And did you hear the formula for a happy marriage?
It's between a husband who is a champion liar and a wife who will believe anything.
Just kidding!
But all kidding aside, you can't kid GOD. You simply cannot lie to GOD within and expect to get away with it. It's as simple as this.
At this point, it ought to be obvious that when I speak of GOD, I am not talking about god in the old-fashioned and theistic sense of the word, the kind that I was taught when I was a child. This is why I now call myself a unitheist.
You will notice that I spell the word GOD using all capitals. It is a way of indicating that GOD, to me, is all that IS. Because I am masculine, when I use the pronoun for GOD, I feel comfortable using the word She. Females are perfectly free to use the pronoun, He. Another solution could be to use the lower case ‘god' as a pronoun. Whatever turns you on…

Let me make it perfectly clear that when I ask you to think about GOD, and your faith in GOD, it is not my intention to destroy anyone's sincerely held belief, or faith. Faith is a very personal thing. Like love, it cannot be forced. You cannot command people to faith anymore than you can command them to love. If you are comfortable with the belief that there is a God who is a human-like and masculine Super being, a kind of celestial and loving Heavenly Father, then, because all things are possible, you have the right to believe what you believe.

However, because we all believe that, in some mysterious way, whatever GOD is, GOD IS LOVE, let us be loving enough to understand that there those who have difficulty with the traditional faith and beliefs. There are many good people who have become actual and/or practical atheists because they can no longer sincerely believe in the so-called “faith of our father“ and in a so-called loving God who is supposed to ‘deliver us from evil'.
I've had people ask me:
“Rev. King, how can you, and millions of Christians, say this prayer—deliver us from evil—Sunday after Sunday and still go on believing that there is a personal God who hear and answers prayers?
Surely you must read the papers, listen to the radio and watch the TV news, don't you? [I have to admit that I wouldn't miss the news, good and bad.]
Day after day there are dozens of stories of men, women and children, of all races and creeds, who are victims of horrendous atrocities. Millions have been driven from the homes, forced to live in refugee camps, cold and starved. Children, of all ages, are killed and/or maimed for life after stepping on land mines.

On the nightly news their full color picture of people who have been blown to bits in terrorist attacks. And not just in cities ‘over there'.

Who hasn't heard about the bombing at Oklahoma? Who hasn't heard about Waco? Like Jonestown, the people at Waco died as members of a religious cult, for heaven's sake, victims of evil perpetrated in the name of God. Even peace loving Canada has had its own version of the shootings at Columbine. Did you read the story of the son of a devout Anglican minister who got shot in Tabor, Alberta? We're talking Canada, here.

If there is an all-powerful and all loving heavenly father why would he allow this? Come on now! Let's get real, here! How can anyone make sense of this? You know, you're going to have to go some to convince me there is a personal God who hears and answers prayers.“

To this I could add my own and personal list of tragedies, including deaths. Both my parents died at a relatively early age. So did my oldest brother and sister. Before her death, my sister lost her husband and only two children. Tuberculosis killed many people in early part of this century, now coming to a close.
When I was the minister in Pointe Claire Que., I got the news that one of my beloved nephews, the son of my oldest living brother had died—the victim of a tragic accident. He fell on a knife. The knife was in his inside pocket. He fell on it while climbing up a hill. A friend, who was with him at the time, tried to help. When he gave his report here is what he said:

Leonard found the knife, a rigid kind, while were cleaning out the boat to get it ready for winter. It was so rusty, I thought he had thrown it away. When he fell, because I didn't see the knife—it was inside his jacket—I tried to lift him to his feet. Suddenly he went limp. Then I saw the blood and realized what had happened. His last words to me, before I rushed to get help, were in the form of a question: “Why is it getting dark all of sudden, Bill?“ He was 18.
Another nephew drowned when the snowmobile he got for Christmas went through ice. He was alone.
To this I could add scores of tragic stories from the lives of people to whom I have ministered over the years. On and on it goes. Add your own list.

The point I am making is this: Tragic stories like this have forced me to listen carefully and to think seriously when people ask: “Where is this merciful, loving and all powerful Heavenly Father when people, especially good and decent people, could really use some help?
The problem of evil, of pain and suffering, especially when it happens to seemingly good people, is really a difficult one.

Perhaps this explains why very few people go on praying, reading their Bibles and “talking“ to “him“ once they get beyond a certain age. They become what I have heard described as, “practical atheists“. Recently, I heard a Catholic Sister, Mary Jo Leddy, a widely respected journalist and founding editor of the Catholic New Times, make this point, in an interview with CBC's, Michael Enright (Sunday Morning Magazine).

Years ago, I must confess, I was on the verge of becoming a “practical atheist“. Fortunately, the words and writings of some very wise people inspired me. With their help, I discovered that it is okay to think outside the box. Also, they gave me the courage to think for myself.

IT'S OKAY TO BE IMPERFECT AND, SOMETIMES, EVEN TO BE WRONG
From them I learned that in matters of faith, it is okay to is wrong, to make mistakes, to change ones mind, and even to risk heresy. I believed then, and I still believe this: It is better to believe the wrong thing than to believe nothing. A blind faith is better than no faith. It is better to have a false hope than have no hope at all. Cynicism, pessimism and the “faith“ that life is absurd and meaningless, to me, is totally unacceptable. The atheistic existentialism of Bertrand Russell, Sartre, Cameau and the like may have some value, but not for me.
On the religion page of Saturday's Toronto star there appeared an article: SEPARATING ETHICS FROM RELIGION. It is about the recent book by Dr. Robert Buckman, CAN WE BE GOOD WITHOUT GOD. Buckman, raised a reformed Jew and is now an atheist who argues that we can indeed be good without God. He is a man of many talents. Reading the review of his book and knowing something of his life from his TV work and interviews, I would not call him an atheist, I see his a practical unitheist. He obviously believes in the value of existence.

[Incidentally, certain fundamentalists teach that, no matter how good and sincere they are, all doubters, and all non-Christians, if they fail to repent and become born-again Christians, are automatically doomed to spend eternity in hell. I can't agree. This may be a sincerely held faith, but I believe it is a wrong and a blind one.]


THE VALUE OF UNITHEISM
Here, I have a confession to make. Until I came across and developed, in my own way, what I now call unitheism, I was on the verge of becoming a practical atheist. I credit this to the invention and development of the computer. Untheism, for me, is an intellectually honest and satisfying theology which fits in with the computer age.



THE ROOT CAUSE OF EVIL
If we consciously choose to neglect the creative power of the universe, or worse, if we consciously choose to oppose it and embrace the way of SIN and EVIL—immoral and unethical behaviour, we will self-destruct, crush ourselves, eliminate and destroy ourselves. Most theologians agree that there is no need for a god or a devil to destroy us. We'll do it ourselves. Life is an inside job.

“Sin“ according to theologians come in two major varieties. The Bible points out that there are sins of COMMISSION. The Lord's prayer calls them ‘trespasses'—the things we do to harm people, the family, the community and the world. Crimes are prime examples of such sin. The Ten Commandments focus on this kind of sin.

Then there are sins of OMMISSION. An old version of the Lord's prayer calls them ‘debts'. This refers to not just financial debts. They are the things we ought to do yet fail to do, for one another—and the world. Here is where most of us fall short. Here is where Jesus placed his focus when he preached his Sermon on the Mount and he gave us his version of the Great Commandment. The Bible tells us that he came into the world—in the flesh, incarnation, the central message of Christmas—to “save us from our sins“
At this point, I am going to presume that all of you, who are hearing or reading these words, are basically good people, morally and ethically, okay? Like me, you are not perfect, yet. So you want to be saved from you sins, as well as be delivered from the power of evil. And, I am sure you are well aware that we are all experts at omitting to do what we ought to do. However, also like me, you are quite ready and willing to accept all the help available that keeps us pointing in the right direction and towards the goal of eternal salvation. Agreed? If so you are now ready to go on to discover H O W, I believe, this can be done. I presume you are ready and willing to hear more.

[When I speak like this to a group, I usually give people the opportunity to respond. I ask: So far, How many agree ( )? How many disagree ( )? How many neutral ( )? How many are confused
( )? Are there any questions? How many went to sleep ( )? It is a kind of opinion poll, which serves to get attention, to get people thinking and participating. Your quick response to this post will be appreciated.] The Rev. (More to follow.)






GOD, a definition

Before, we can discuss the “HOW to access GOD“ we need to know the kind of “god“ it is we desire to access.

I happen to believe—and I admit I have no proof of this—that the “god“ to whom some people say they talk to in prayer is little more than an idol created in the imagination. “He“ is not unlike a celestial Santa Claus. No put down intended. A few grow up and go on believing in “him“; but most don't. They reject what they feel, instinctively, is bad theology. And I don't blame them. Unfortunately, they are either unwilling, or unable, to take the time to replace it with a good one. Tom Harpur, known to me, author and former Religion Editor of the Toronto Star writes a lot about this. He and others often tell us that theologizing is work. It takes thought. So does prayer and meditation.

The first step is, be honest.
The second step is, be open.
The third step is be open-mindedness.

Now, this is where things can become very risky. Because I can't take the time in a short sermon to tell you all I believe and exactly how I believe it, I am risking being misunderstood.
I have been accused of being so open-minded to new ideas that there is a danger my brains could fall out. [And I don't want to hear anyone mumbling, “Well, that wouldn't be much of a loss!“]
However, I am willing to risk it. I am willing to risk believing in GOD. However, I do not believe HE is someone up there who thinks, speaks, feels and acts like a Super Person, or Being. This is why “He“ doesn't always rush to my rescue, like a loving earthly father would, especially if he had god-like powers.
On the other hand, there are times when I seem to be, conscious of, and in touch with a yet to be understood eternal and infinite power that can come into the world—that is, can incarnate—through persons, like you and me.

Because of this, I now believe that god, she, he, it is evolving along with us into the future. Jesus, himself, said, “I am among you as one that serves“. He certainly was subject to the limitations of this world. Despite this, traditionalists, taken at their word, teach that God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are one and the same. That is, that Jesus was not only THE Son of God, he WAS and IS GOD.

Are they not saying, “GOD is among us, as one that serves?“ There is a modern song with the first line, “What if God is one of us…?“ I would change the line to read, “What if GOD is all of us…“ Such a belief requires a new kind of faith.
A NEW KIND OF FAITH
Without denigrating traditional faiths—and there are numerous of them, not just Christian—here is where there is a role for a new kind of faith, a sighted faith—one rooted in reason and utilizing the science of the spirit—pneumatology. True science is not the enemy of sighted faith.





Finally, let's talk about the greatest power in the world—willpower.
W stands for the willpower—the highest of all powers.
Willpower used positively is another way of saying LOVE power. “Faith, hope and Love“ said Paul, “but the greatest of these is love.“ LOVE is the central theme of this time of year—Christmas. It is the power that helps us get in tune with the Infinite. And getting in tune with the infinite is this simple. It is as simple as an act of will.

Once you make the act of will, and keep making it, you will be given the power to do. It is like getting on line. You begin by the simple act of will, the act of turning on your computer. Once you are on line, you can access any Site on the Web. Once you get on the power line of love you can access GOD'S Web Pages.

Well, thanks Shawn!. It was quite by "accident"--I call it the guidance of G-d within--that I discovered that someone has done me the honour of quoting this sermon which I gave and published almost a year ago. I have been writing on this theme, on the Web, since 1999--maybe even before that.

For some time now, I have carrying on a very heated debate with a number of people at <www.theboomer.com/forum> --some of them have attacked unitheism, and me, personally--shall I sayquite vigourously? And with salty, to say the least, words.

Well, thanks Shawn!. It was quite by "accident"--I call it the guidance of G-d within--that I discovered that someone has done me the honour of quoting this sermon which I gave and published almost a year ago. I have been writing on this theme, on the Web, since 1999--maybe even before that.

For some time now, I have carrying on a very heated debate with a number of people at <www.theboomer.com/forum> --some of them have attacked unitheism, and me, personally--shall I sayquite vigourously? And with salty, to say the least, words.

BTW, I am a redirected and refired-up--don't like the term 'retired'--minister of the United Church of Canada (The Presbyterian, Methodist, and Congregational union took place, June 10, 1925) I did post grad studies--1954-1955 at Boston U and Harvard. Martin Luther King graduated from BU in 1954, as a new minister.

For some time now, I have been carrying on a very heated debate with a number of people at <www.theboomer.com/forum> --some of them have attacked unitheism, and me, personally--shall I say, quite vigourously? And with salty, to say the least, words. I prefer the quality and tone here. However, I do not mind people challenging my concepts and ideas. It is the argumentum ad hominems that I find unecessary.

BTW, I am a redirected and refired-up--don't like the term 'retired'--minister of the United Church of Canada (The Presbyterian, Methodist, and Congregational union took place, June 10, 1925) I did post grad studies--1954-1955 at Boston U and Harvard. And, interestingly, Martin Luther King, who was born one year plus a day before me, graduated, from BU in 1954, as a new minister as I was entering to do post grad.


Be patient with me, I am just getting the hang as to how things work in this forum.

http://www.theosophical.ca/SevenSoulsMan.htm

Mr King, that is an excellent piece of philosophy, I cannot thank you enough for writing it. It is rare that a piece shakes and effects me the way this one has

It has opened up a whole new avenue of thought for me. I love the idea of Unitheism, it has given a name to my religion box and I will use it if you don't mind from here onward in my own work.

Laz, I am not sure whether or not I responded to your comment about unitheism.

Since this past June I now have an interactive forum my url is http://www.flfcanada.com There Warren Farr and I are carrying out a dialogue on unitheiism. He is from Paducah, Kentucky.

In addition he has his own site unitheist.org

He quotes my definition at http://www.unitheist.org/whatis.html

It is now November 5, 2007, I am visiting this page to see what was written back then--Dec 27, 2003, 10:42 AM
..
It is now Sunday, April 13, 2008,
http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3623&hl=