Day: March 9, 2017

Heaven Is Not A Retirement Destination

 

I recall an episode of The Twilight Zone TV series where a man of suspicious character is killed and suddenly finds himself regaining consciousness in the hereafter. He is greeted by a host, who has been given the special responsibility to see that all the dead man’s needs are taken care of. Everything works out perfectly—too perfectly. The dead man wins at everything he does.

After awhile, having everything go his way actually starts driving him crazy. He begs his host not to have everything rigged so that he always wins. Finally, he tells his host that he doesn’t deserve to be in such a perfect world and pleads to be taken to that “other” place. It is then, that he is informed that he is in that other place.

I am not implying that in hell one is waited on hand and foot, just that happiness cannot be obtained from such a one-sided scenario. Heavenly happiness must be something else.

We rarely contemplate what eternal happiness might actually consist of. Heaven is certainly the continuation of life in a more perfect realm. But how is life perfected and what constitutes living in blessedness to eternity? The answer to that question is in plain sight to all of us and simply involves a little reflection on what the dynamics of life already reveals. If we contemplate the bio-complexity of our anatomy, it becomes quite apparent that it is ordered and arranged according to mutual interrelatedness and interdependence. Organic unity (relational holism) comes from the harmony of shared utility. Individual cells serve the needs of the entire body and the body serves all the needs of the cells.

The same dynamics hold true for human society. The “glue” and quality of a nation, region, city, or small community is based on the quality of services and talents that are shared among its individuals. So the same divine patterning principle is being expressed by both bio-diversity and human diversity. Life is service. Life cannot be separated from duty.

This is why we often hear stories about people who die soon after retirement. These deaths often seem premature to us and puzzling. But staying engaged and useful to others seems to have real health benefits. The human mind falls apart if its energies are not engaged in challenging new activity (the devil’s workshop). So if life essentially consists of reciprocal utility, happiness in heaven must allow for such a sharing of talents to increase, intensify, and perfect itself through eternity. This is the exaltation of love.

Ironically, what makes hell a hell is work, and, what makes heaven a heaven is also work. But those in heaven do so for the love of serving others, while those in hell—who for selfish reasons will not work unless there is immediate personal profit—end up only being able to perform lowly menial tasks within God’s economic system of love.

Happiness is not one-sided or self-centered. In fact, our individuality finds itself the more we are in useful service to others. And this increases in heaven because our inner potentials are locked up in our spirit. The spirit is not material and therefore not limited within the constraints of space and time. So, our spirit’s inner potential can be continuously opened throughout eternity, as we strive towards greater usefulness. How else would a God of love create the universe?

Posted on February 6, 2008by

http://www.provinggod.com

This entry was posted in Inner growth, Life after death, love, psychology, Reality, religion, unity and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Is Scripture a Fairy Tale?

 

Is the Bible the inspired Word of God? Or, are they the stories of simple people, who lacking scientific sophistication, had to rely on their imagination to make sense of the cosmos. Look at the biblical passage below:

Babel, the ornament of kingdoms, shall be as God’s overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah; the tziim shall lie there, their houses shall be filled with ochim, and the daughters of the owl shall dwell there, and the satyrs shall dance there; the ijim shall answer in her palaces, and the dragons in the palaces of her delight. (Isa. 13:19, 21, 22)

The Holy World contains stories of talking serpents, fearful giants, satyrs, and great dragons. These are also the sorts of creatures that one expects to find in mythologies and fairy tales. To say that something is a myth or fairy tale is to imply that it has no ontological status—that it isn’t something real. Why then would an all-foreseeing and infinitely wise Creator make use of such fantastic creatures knowing full well that these stories would eventually come under the scrutiny of the post modern world?

Can entities have real existence independent of what the physical world shows us? Can creatures exist within the laws of higher orders of reality? And, could these creatures be relevant to our everyday lives by having a real causal influence on what happens in the world?

We often describe Hitler as a monster. Yet, physically, he fully possessed the same human features as everyone else. So where does the hideous disfigurement reside?

When we see someone perform self-less acts to help others why do we say to that person “How big of you to do that?” And, why do we often refer to a selfish individual as a “small person?” What kind of non-physical metrics are we instinctively applying to the stature of people that we deal with everyday?

Why are the people we encounter in life seen on the one hand as being sharks, snakes in the grass, parasites, or wolves in sheep’s clothing, and on the other hand, seen as being innocent as doves or gentle as lambs? Isn’t it obvious that these images help to portray qualities that we are detecting from people’s true inner realities?

Therefore, are we abandoning modern scientific positivism and degenerating into superstitious goat-herders by such imaginative forays? If we can make use of this symbolic representation to express a more real picture of things operating underneath the surface, why can’t God?

In terms of salvation, isn’t it this inner reality of the human heart and mind that religion seeks to address and offer its guidance?

Posted on February 2, 2008by

http://www.provinggod.com

This entry was posted in Inner growth, psychology, Reality, religion, science, unity and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Soul – Does my pet have one?

soulOur pets are loyal and affectionate members of our family and we don’t ever want to be parted from them. Lucy a beautiful black cat has lived with us for seventeen years and is nearing the end of her days. To ask ‘Do animals have a soul?’ implies that you do believe in the soul but don’t know if animals have one.

Meanings of soul

Perhaps the answer depends on exactly what is meant by ‘soul’. Here are some possible meanings.

  • Once when Lucy was placed in a boarding cattery when we were away on holiday, she was said to be like a lost soul. Soul in this sense can refer to the individuality of the creature.
  • Soul can mean the essence of something. It’s central character, nature, or quality. If Lucy could bare her soul I’m sure she would purr her satisfaction with her comfortable basket, fishy food and daily strokes. Like other cats her central quality appears to me to be her sensory enjoyment of life.
  • Soul can mean the source of a pet’s feeling and behaviour, regarded as a distinct non-material entity separate from, and animating, it’s physical body. When younger, Lucy, like each living soul with youth, was certainly more full of life and the way she has been cared for has been enough to keep body and soul together. Science can directly observe the effects of life but has never created life itself. It cannot explain the phenomenon of animal instinct. Without a spiritual source to their lives how else can animals show unlearned knowledge of how to feed themselves, find their way home, and nurture their young?
  • Soul can mean a higher quality of mind. Lucy doesn’t say much and is the soul of discretion, but we can’t really say this is the reason for trusting her with our personal secrets. I guess it is difficult to say our cat has a higher quality of mind as such. She is affectionate to those who feed her and shows a limited degree of tolerance with the children but it is hard to imagine her developing more virtues than these. They say confession is good for the soul, but I’ve noticed no sign of any guilty conscience whenever she gets caught in some misdemeanour. On the other hand no animal I know of has ever behaved with the depravity and cruelty of some people. To sell one’s soul to the devil seems a possibility open only to a human being.
  • One meaning of soul is that of an immortal soul. When someone dies we tend to say God rest his or her soul. They may have been through struggle and strife and we wish them peace. Some would feel this sentiment is also appropriate for an animal. Will I ever see my pet cat again after her death?

Immortality of the soul

Why should you believe in the immortality of the soul?

A first suggested answer is in terms of the experience of a mystic and spiritual philosopher Emanuel Swedenborg. Over the last 27 years of his life, he claimed to be able to see and hear what went on in what he termed ‘the spiritual world’ which he said was peopled with the spirits of human beings who had once lived on earth. He described their first condition after death. At first being involved with the outward aspects of their life, they experience things as little different from what they were used to on earth. To my mind this would include the form of their home, their clothes and perhaps the animals with which they were familiar. So perhaps I will see our pet again after I die.

The second answer to the question is in terms of a philosophical consideration. Swedenborg offers us the idea that eternal human life – a life after death not involving physical time and space – arises from our ability to understand and perceive timeless things and matters that transcend place. I would suggest examples of this are human appreciation of higher art and perception of beauty, our capacity for reflection, the experience of the state of meditation, understanding of ethics of conduct in social affairs, and rational thought that transcends desire. It is difficult to imagine a cat being aware of and appreciating a beautiful painting, or an uplifting musical composition.

Swedenborg maintains that our immortality also comes from an inner liberty that is reflected in our motivation, that gives us free-will to choose our intentions, and that, subject to external circumstances, allows us to make personal choices and to execute plans which fulfill our aims.

These two spiritual faculties he calls rationality and liberty.

Do animals have an immortal soul?

So do animals have immortal souls too? My answer thus hinges on whether they can be said to have rationality and inner liberty. Certainly my cat seems to know what she wants and has a will of her own. But her freedom of choice seems to be limited by her natural instincts conditioned by the system of rewards and punishments she has encountered in daily living. The same might be said by some people about us humans. Traditionally, science has assumed human behaviour is determined by nature and nurture: inner liberty of personal choice doesn’t seem to have a place in its theory.

I would say that human freedom seems to be broadened by illuminated thought. Understanding what is morally good in one course of action as opposed to what is bad in another will inform your decision making. Animals don’t appear to have this kind of deeper  understanding. Consequently, we do not hold them responsible for their actions. Animals can’t be accused of criminal conduct because only we are culpable in law. I assume our pets are uninterested in personal growth, nor fight temptation nor seek enlightenment.

So I conclude my cat has a soul but not an immortal one. Having said that I still expect to see her again in an afterlife because she represents for me the love and affection we have shared for so long.

Copyright 2014 Stephen Russell-Lacy
Author of  Heart, Head & Hands  Swedenborg’s perspective on emotional problems

Posted on17th August 2014AuthorEditorCategoriesHuman nature, Meaning of lifeTags,, , ,

Gender – Are there deep differences?

genderWhen the women’s movement spoke up for the value of women it rebelled against the traditional gender stereotypes and proclaimed equality between the sexes. It quite rightly opposed any idea of male superiority and female subservience.

Some fear that any talk of gender is only a short step from women being different to being inferior – thus justifying discrimination. After all, women’s pay still usually lags behind men’s despite a sea-change in social attitudes regarding sexism. And so feminists continue to advocate seeing people as individuals regardless of gender and the term ‘gender’ is rejected as a concept constructed socially to reinforce the power of men.

Gender and science

Scientists argue about whether gender roles are biologically based or come about through social learning. But those like the well known researcher Steven Pinker have discovered quite a bit of research data regarding infants, children and adult behaviour which supports some differences between male and female and how the two sexes can complement each other.

“Research conducted throughout the world shows gender balance in top positions contributes to improved competitiveness and better business performance.” (Beth Brooke, top business professional)

Another example of this is to do with amiability.

“Studies have been done showing that there really are gender differences, that women do bring more congeniality and compromise to the table.” (Kitty Kelley, investigative biographer)

Anyone writing about gender in terms of personal experience can only do so from his or her own perspective as a man or woman. I happen to be a man and so am understandably open to the criticism of being biased. But if I were a woman the same criticism might also be applied.

“Only the creator understands both sexes. The rest of us are one or the other. We know only our own. Few writers are bold enough to attempt to define the differences succinctly” (Alan Grange, Christian clergyman)

The question that interests me is whether we should try to ignore gender as if it were of no relevance. Are there no deeper distinctions between men and women other than their physical make up?

Brain gender difference

There is a growing amount of research finding that brains of men and women do differ. Brain activity is more diffuse for women and more specific for men in relation to vocabulary, visio-spatial perception and emotion.

In their book ‘Brain Sex: The real difference between men and women’ Anne Moir and David Jessel point out that research has shown that the two halves of the brain have a different neurological pattern in men than in women. The connection between the left and right brain in men is less marked than in women, leading to a greater distinction between the two halves and their respective functions.

Men, then, tend to keep information distinct from emotion. In women, the connection between the two halves is greater, tending to lead women to see / feel things with more co-ordination and with less distinction. A woman generally works with her whole brain; a man with one or other part of his brain.” (Anne Moir and David Jessel.)

Working with one’s whole brain ties in with the common stereotype that the female gender tend to perceive in a holistic intuitive way whereas the male gender are more liable to think logically.

Gender related values and interests

I do get the impression that the two sexes have some different preferences and concerns.

I am not sure gender ever won’t be an issue in comedy, because I think that women do have different priorities in some respects.( Jenny Éclair, British comedian)

Is it not a mistake to confuse inequality of value to society of men and women with inequality of gender-related interests?

Any difference in inclination or make up between the two sexes is no argument for them having unequal value or unequal opportunity.

Many women become troubled at any suggestion that their main strengths are heart-centred, as if this were in some way of lesser value. In one sense they are right. The cause of their objection is the reality that – albeit mistakenly – the world does value power and the acquisition of money over the nurturing of people and expression of care.

“ In so many occupations, it is principally the head or the intellectual, understanding side of us which has an intrinsic monetary value, whilst the affections of the heart … attracts only compliments.” (Bruce Jarvis, Swedenborgian writer)

Gender difference in disposition

According to spiritual philosopher Emanuel Swedenborg, both sexes are capable of intelligent thought and warmth of feeling. At the same time he says feelings of loving concern tend to stay longer in good women and a good man finds it easier to think longer in rational light. The way Swedenborg puts it is to say that with men the mind is elevated into superior light, with women into superior heat. The male is said to be concerned that his actions are directed by the sensible thoughts of the head — or if they are not, he wants them to appear so.

These days such opinions are often heard as sexist — that women are more emotional and men are cleverer — but this is exactly not what Swedenborg is saying. A similar range of intelligence and emotional reactivity is found in both men and women. He says the difference is in perception.

“It is masculine to perceive from the understanding and feminine to perceive from love. The understanding perceives things which are above the body and beyond the world, but love does not go beyond what it feels. (Emanuel Swedenborg, spiritual philosopher)

Copyright 2014 Stephen Russell-Lacy
Author of  Heart, Head & Hands  Swedenborg’s perspective on emotional problems