There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all.
~Ephesians 4:4-6 (NRSV).

Unity is the church. The church has very little without the cogent sense of unity, in and under Christ – who is Lord of all.

There is a threefold triadic structure eminent in this passage: 1) body, Spirit, hope; 2) Lord, faith, baptism; 3) one God and Father of all – over, through and in all.

What this sense of unity is about is simple. It’s characterised by way of seven key elements, unifying the whole in completeness in identification through Christ to the Father in heaven:

1. One Body

I am covering this element of Christian unity in an upcoming article to be titled, Church Essence – Body Fellowship. However, it is via identification in Christ that universally qualifies the Body – a universal ‘machine’ and a force for Christ in this world. ‘One Body’ is an entirely new concept heralded in the New Testament – it is a tradition not seen so much in Old Testament times under ‘the Elect.’

2. One Spirit

This verse could be read that the Body (above) is solemnised in one Spirit. Indeed, as John Stott puts it, “Thus, it is our common possession of the one Holy Spirit that integrates us into one body.”[1]

It is clear to all of us, I hope, that the one common Spirit resides in all of us, activated by belief in Christ – belief in his death and resurrection to the purpose of redemption.

3. One Hope

Here, for Paul, there is a quick departure. He hearkens the reader back to verse 1. Our hope is centred onto the calling we’ve received; that to follow Christ heavenward for the prize of eternal life, both here and to come.

This same hope we share with all others in fellowship and keeping with God. The call is punctuated via this one singular hope: Christ.

4. One Lord

The third person of the Trinity or Godhead has already been discussed – we’re one in Spirit. Now Paul turns to the second person of the Trinity. There is a linkage now between the terms “faith” and “baptism” that immediately follow and the second person of the Godhead – God the Son – Jesus himself.

5. One Faith

There are few sweeter gospel summaries than Paul’s in Ephesians 2:1-10. He succinctly roadmaps faith for all believers in this section; ‘one faith’ is the one, singular gospel of Jesus Christ.

6. One Baptism

Notwithstanding a previous ezine-article I wrote recently, What Must I Do to Be Saved?, we’re called to a higher calling, to enter the church, through baptism.

Now, this one subject – of all subjects – has often caused more disunity than unity over the present age, from Christ’s resurrection, than most others. There are a variety of different takes on the theology of baptism.

Some believe it means water baptism, others, the fire of Spiritual Baptism (baptism of the Holy Spirit), and others again, the believer’s baptism, which is simply faith per Romans 10:8-9 (which is covered in the abovementioned article) by way of identification in Jesus’ death and resurrection. Snodgrass agrees by highlighting that “Paul was not speaking about the mode or timing of a ceremony; he was saying no other baptism exists except baptism into Christ.”[2]

Whatever theology we hold to we should ensure it’s inclusive in nature, for unity is the real prize for which we’re all called heavenward.

7. One God

Everything truly begins and ends with God the Father himself – all else in the whole of creation, with literally no exception, waits on the Father. The key feature of this theology is the Shema of Deuteronomy 6:4 – Yahweh is One. This, at last, calls us to be unified to the first person of the Godhead, having already considered unification with the Spirit, initially, and the Son.

He is forever above us, through every part of us, and in us. Nothing can separate us – in these terms – from the Father in heaven.

Summary

The clearest purpose we can reach in reading Paul’s passage with most clarity is that we’re called to theological oneness – a seemingly impossible invocation to the divisible church nowadays, or in any day for that matter, especially where our common, encroachable humanity – the flesh – descends, spoils and rots.
We’re to be marked for our unity and inclusiveness – under Christ.

This means stamping out divisive elements by tolerance and reason, not counterattack. Where tolerance and reason do not cut the theological custard we can but accept it and move on as we were, loving the divisive element all the very same.

© 2010 S. J. Wickham.

[1] Harry Uprichard, Ephesians – An EP Study Commentary (Darlington, England: Evangelical Press, 2004), p. 200.
[2] Klyne Snodgrass, The NIV Application Commentary – Ephesians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1996), p. 211.

Most Christians think Bible study is so mysterious and requires so much education, they don’t attempt it. There really is no mystery to understanding most of Scripture. If we spend prayerful time studying what’s in the Bible and ask a few simple questions, we can get what we need out of any segment of God’s Word. You’ll certainly get much more than just reading or listening to someone else explain it. You can go into more depth if you want to learn how to use other tools, like a concordance or a lexicon, but you can get quite a bit out of Scripture just by asking and answering six types of questions when you study.

Who? Who questions give us the direction of the group of Bible verses we’re reading. Who is doing the speaking or writing? Who are they speaking or writing to? Who is the section of Scripture about? You can find out if the verses are just about one person “Jesus wept” or a universal promise “to all whom God will call” just by asking “who.” Without knowing the “Who” of God’s Word, it’s very difficult to figure out what parts apply to everyone and what parts only apply to the people being addressed.

What? Do you want a clear understanding of the subject in a group of Scriptures? You must answer the “what” questions. This makes the subject more vivid. What is being said about what? Is it a law, a sin, a character trait? What are we supposed to do…follow, avoid, develop, ask for? There are many more “what’s” in the Bible than we will ever find just skimming the surface. “What” is a very important question.

Why? This requires a little more analysis. By asking the question “why” we’re able to pick up hidden clues in the Scripture text. Asking why and trying to find the answers can give you new meaning to the whole verse or whole chapter. Why did he write or say this? Why should we do what the verse tells us to? Why did they react to the situation the way they did? Sometimes stories are instructions on what to do and other times examples of what not to do. So, another why to ask about anything in the Bible is, “Why would God want me to know this?” It helps us apply His Word to our lives.

How? Ever heard someone talk about the power of prayer? The Bible clearly reveals that the power is in God, not in prayer. When we’re studying Scriptures on prayer, asking how the prayers are answered keeps us from mistakenly crediting our prayers instead of God’s power and love. Ask, how are the “what’s” being done? How were they done? How are they to be done in the future? There are far more “how’s” in Scripture than we can find just by reading or listening. The “How’s” add power to our lives. How can Paul, or we, do all things? Through Christ! “How’s” are powerful! The last “how” question we should ask is, “How does this apply to me?”

Where? This gives us the local context in which to understand the verses under study. When Paul tells us how to receive the peace that passes all understanding, it adds power to Paul’s words when we understand the “where” he wrote from was a Roman prison. Sometimes, knowing where someone is helps explain what they’re saying, like when Jesus said every stone of the temple would be thrown down…it’s good to know it was the temple in Jerusalem to figure out if that prophecy had been fulfilled. “Where” also helps explain a local application to the Scripture that may not apply to people elsewhere.

When? This question also gives us context. When were the verses written? Were they written about the past, present or future? In what order do things happen? Do these Scriptures apply to only those times, or are they universal, applying to us, as well? “When” is an interesting question to ask in trying to understand God, who lives outside of time and space. How could we understand the words of Jesus, “Before Abraham was born, I am.” without asking “when” questions?

Try this at home: Take a couple sheets of paper, one of your favorite chapters of Scripture and an hour of your time. Evenly space the questions on the 2 pages. Then, take a few verses at a time and write down the answers to the six types of questions. I’d be willing to bet you’ll find some new meanings and applications to your life. If you do, I challenge you to take one book of the New Testament (say, 1 John) and do the same thing, 2-3 chapters a week. Let me know the things you learn!

The Word of God isn’t meant to be mysterious or confusing. The Bible is God’s message to us regular folk about His love and His power in our lives. We can tap into His power if we will stop depending on others to interpret the Word of God for us. Instead, all we need is the Holy Spirit, because, “…you do not need anyone to teach you…” 1 John 2:27

Final draft for 15

Renaissance science and the urgent need to readdress social economics

During the 1930s The Laurence Professor of Ancient Philosophy at Cambridge University, F M Cornford, the author of Principium Sapientiae: The Origins of Greek Philosophical Thought, was elected a Fellow of the British Academy. His book Before and After Socrates has been continually used to influence academic thinking throughout the entire world for over 80 years. Since 1932 Cambridge University has published 10 editions of this work. Cornford’s brilliantly argued scholarly works can be considered to be anchored upon a trite nonsensical religious assumption exposed by Sir Isaac Newton within his unpublished more profound natural philosophy, discovered last century which balanced the mechanical description of the universe.

Tens of millions of pounds were spent by Cambridge University to research the vast new technologies associated with Newton’s guidelines, which established a basis for the science of quantum biology. Eminent scientists knew better than to challenge the edict that classified Newton’s balanced science as an insane heresy. Nonetheless, that technology is now being researched worldwide and ethical life-science discoveries have been made, making it perfectly obvious that Sir Isaac Newton was not insane when he wrote about his balancing physics principles derived from the Classical Greek life-science. As Sir C P Snow warned the world during his 1959 Rede Lecture at Cambridge University, unless modern science shakes off it present obsession with the totally destructive law that governs it and rebalances itself with with the Classical Greek Humanities, then civilisation will be destroyed.

Francis MacDonald considered that Plato was one of the founding fathers of the Christian Church. This philosophical statement can be considered to be nonsensical, linked to a general British attitude that the Classical Greek life-science, as a pagan phenomenon, did not quite match up to the academic standards of British Christian Academia. Encyclopaedia Britannica advises that in the 5th Century St Augustine was the mind which mostly completely fused the Platonic tradition of Greek philosophy with the religion of the New Testament. That accomplishment may be quite correct but, St Augustine’s association of female sexuality with the destructive evil of unformed matter within the atom was indeed insane rather than Sir Isaac Newton’s contention that religion has corrupted science.

During that time Pope Cyril presided when a Christian mob burnt scrolls belonging to the Great Library of Alexandria and murdered its custodian, the mathematician Hypatia. If the Classical Greek life-science has been corrupted by the Christian religion it can be considered reasonable to investigate the opinion of the great scientist, Sir Isaac Newton who developed a heretical world view based upon the physics principles that once upheld that lost science.

The NASA Astrophysics High Energy Division Library has published that the Classical Greek life-science was based upon the mathematics of fractal logic. Sir Isaac Newton’s unpublished heresy papers, discovered during the 20th Century, contained his certain conviction that a more profound natural philosophy existed to balance the mechanical description of the universe. It is common knowledge that Newton, in opposition to the scientific world view of his time, considered that the universe was infinite. The logic to accommodate that concept is the infinite property of fractal logic.

Newton’s balancing physics principles were the same ones that upheld the lost Greek fractal logic life-science and he wrote that both ancient science and spiritual knowledge had been corrupted by religion. One of Newton’s specific research interests concerned the generation of wealth within the science of economics. An investigation into Plato’s concepts of spiritual reality reveal relevant political and economic concepts which might be used in computer science to make economic models to create new futuristic human survival simulations.

Plato’s spiritual reality concepts have been brought into a 21st Century life-science focus. Amy Edmonson, Novatis Professor at Harvard University, in her online book entitled The Fuller Explanation, wrote that Buckminster Fuller had used Plato’s spiritual engineering principles to develop life-energy physics concepts that completely challenged the present Western culture’s world view. The three 1996 Nobel Laureates in Chemistry, using nano-technology, located the fractal logic of Fullerene phenomena functioning within the DNA. They have established a medical fractal life-science institute associated with Plato’s spiritual engineering principles.

During the 15th Century, Cosimo Medici re-established the Platonic Academy in Florence, banished in the 6th Century by the Christian Emperor Justinian, because it was considered pagan. Under the directorship of Marsilio Ficino the Classical Greek life science about the functioning of the atoms of the soul was reintroduced into science. The moon’s influence on the female fertility cycle was linked to harmonic resonance within the atomic metabolism as a science to explain a mother’s love and compassion for children. Epicurus’ Science of universal love was later taught by the scientist, Giordano Bruno, at Oxford University. Lured back to Rome, Bruno was imprisoned, tortured and burnt alive in 1600.

We can assume that Sir Isaac Newton was correct in his assumption that the Christian religion has seriously contaminated science. St Thomas Aquinas’ religious wisdom, heralded as an important economic revelation, was used by Thomas Malthus to establish economic policies at the East India Company’s College. Charles Darwin cited Malthus’ Principles of population essay, which had become synonymous with the second law of thermodynamics, as the basis of the life-science that influenced President Woodrow Wilson and his colleague, Alexander Graham Bell, to advocate Darwinian Eugenics in America, from which Adolph Hitler derived his Nazi policies. Blind obedience to the dictates of the Church’s understanding of that law threw Sir Isaac Newton’s balanced world view into the scientific rubbish bin.

It is not at all unreasonable to write that the Church managed to inspire a fanatical, unbalanced worship of the second law of thermodynamics, which absolutely prohibits the existence of the fractal life-science from being associated with Plato’s now validated spiritual engineering principles. Albert Einstein’s religious colleague, Sir Arthur Eddington, referred to the second law as The supreme metaphysical law of the entire universe. Other eminent scientists have classified it in terms from being Diabolical to being insane, but the general public has no idea that Western culture is totally governed by its destructive ethos, in the form of an unbalanced global economic rationalism.

When economic law purports to embrace an aspect of life-science in the form of eternal passions as part of the fabric of Western culture, then the logic upholding Western culture can be considered to be incoherent. The Australian Government’s Productivity Commission, 2008, Behavioural Economics and Public Policy, Roundtable Proceedings, Productivity Commission, Canberra, contains reference to eternal passions and reasons affecting long term economic policies. The only logic that allows those words to have any reality is fractal logic, which cannot possibly be reasoned about by the Australian Government. However, the Government report does advise that The views expressed in these papers are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Productivity Commission. Nonetheless, it is obvious that the idea exists within economic parlance. Adam Smith, the author of The Wealth of Nations, fused the concept of the eternal nature of economic law into a spiritual concept.

Having presented argument that the Church contaminated the structure of Classical Greek life-science and as a result allowed Western culture to be governed by an unbalanced global economic rationalism, it follows that Plato’s economic and political concepts might be given a brief examination.

The inspiration for Plato’s The Republic was Solon’s brief governorship of Athens during the 6th century BCE, during which Solon’s economic policies prevented all out rebellion in Athens by re distributing wealth and replacing Draco’s cruel punishments, used by the aristocracy to terrorise the populace into submission. When Solon restored Athenian economic power as a cultural beacon to other Greek states, the aristocracy had Solon removed from office to pave the way for Pesistratus to take over in Athens to re-establish tyranny, leading to disastrous military adventures. However, Solon’s constitution for the republic was to become the idealised model for later Western democracies.

The Platonic tradition of Greek philosophy was about creating a science from the ancient Egyptian use of fractal geometrical logic to place justice, mercy and compassion into the fabric of political government. This fusing of ethics into the fractal logic Nous of Anaxagoras, a whirling god-like force that acted upon primordial particles to form the worlds and evolve intelligence, was described by Aristotle to be an ethical science to guide ennobling government. The reason that Classical Greek fractal life-science has been corrupted by the Christian Church is because the Nous, as a physics phenomenon, challenged the concept of the Christian God, whose law of total destruction became synonymous with the ancient Greek god, Diabolos.

A reason to examine this issue rather carefully is because the objective of Classical Greek life-science was to ensure that civilisation, by becoming part of the health of the universe, would not become extinct. Plato defined those who did not understand the engineering principles of spiritual reality as barbaric engineers, and he considered them to be continually obsessed with warfare. If that is considered to be an evil obsession, then we need to be aware of Plato’s definition of evil as defined in his Timaeus, a destructive property of unformed matter within the atom.

Apart from the Platonic spiritual reality now becoming basic to a new rigorous fractal logic life-science, the fractal life-science methodology needed to generate futuristic human survival simulations is well known, its precursor research mathematics for simple life-forms being reprinted in 1990 by the world’s largest technological research institution as one of the important discoveries of the 20th Century.

Copyright Professor Robert Pope.

In a close study of Daniel, chapter 8, is a possible revelation of the end times yet in our future.

In verse 9, first we see the temporal or earthly rise of the “little horn.” It/he grows to the south, to the east, and toward Israel, the “glorious land.” Two things we learn here about the man who will come. One, there must be a land farther south of him than Israel. And, two, from where he is at the beginning, Israel is not “east.” Chapter eleven will identify him much more clearly, and show how he indeed did move to the directions here indicated.

Then am I saying that he is merely a historical figure and that this passage has been fulfilled? A thousand times, no! Historical yes, fulfilled , no! Bear with me until you see the whole vision as Daniel saw it! And you still will have trouble. That’s why God saw fit to give Daniel another view of the same man from a different perspective in chapter eleven. There will be no mistaking the identity of this man.

And let me pause here to remind readers that we are not talking about a bright young man named Daniel who conjured up a cool story about the future of nations. We are talking about a very old, confused and overawed man who cowers in the presence of angels and who is being given visions directly from Heaven. Let not cynicism enter our thinking here or we will lose sight of what God is saying. This Word is from heaven. It is pure in every syllable and must be examined carefully.

Verse ten is a turning point. Read it carefully. This man suddenly is having influence in heaven as well as earth. This is no mere mortal any longer. Something has changed! The “little” king has grown up! Grown up to the heavens! Because of him, some of Heaven’s armies are cast to the ground! Perhaps they are in part responsible for the earthly army that surrounds Jerusalem in Luke 21 (or is this army heavenly too, in the worst sense?).

The plot sickens. This vile contender for the throne of Syria and surroundings is now contending for a universal throne, and the throne of the King of Kings. He wants it all! That’s what Gabriel says. He exalts himself to the “Prince” of Heaven.

As the army encircles Jerusalem in this last showdown of history, the “horn” commands that daily sacrifices of the Jews be stopped. No more need to sacrifice to this Jewish God, when a better one is available, himself. The sanctuary is entered by this ruler, then cast down.

Historically this man has been identified as Antiochus Epiphanes. But Biblically, so far, there is no need to do that. I say, there is no need so far. Chapter eleven will tie together the historical man with the future man. But chapter eight does not do that except in one phrase. In explaining who this man is, Gabriel says simply that he arises (not that he is born and raised) in the latter days of one of the four divisions of Alexander’s Empire. This clue, coupled to the descriptive “out of one of them” phrase earlier in the chapter ( verse 9 ) lets us know only that the end time tyrant comes originally from somewhere in post-Alexander Greece. That is, he was born either in Greece, Turkey, The Middle East, or Egypt.

We cannot bring prior knowledge into a text. We let the text speak first. So far the text has only pointed us to Greece and the very end of time, and tied these two eras together in a man. There is no demand by the chapter eight text to bring in Antiochus or any man we have known in history. All that this man does in this text can be done in the future.

We now know, with certainty, where antichrist arises! We also know that when he arises it is with supernatural help. We know that it is he who will, aided by an army -perhaps a heavenly one- stop the Jewish sacrifices and himself profane and destroy the Temple. We see soon the phrase “transgression of desolation” (verse 13) and know we must be close to the very sign Jesus gave for His soon return. And then comes the clear definition of the timing of this man:

Verses 13-14. First there is the exchange between two angels who identify the time period involved as a little more than six years. This time seems to comprise the lead-up to the abomination, the abomination itself, and the subsequent “trampling” (the word used in Luke 21) of Jerusalem.

Verses 15-17. The key conversation which we are granted grace to overhear is between a “Man” and the angel Gabriel. The Man commands Gabriel to help Daniel understand the vision. The first and perhaps most important thing that Daniel is made to understand is that (verse 17) the vision refers to the time of the end. This phrase will be spoken and expanded on several other times later in this book. There is no doubt allowed here that the “little horn” vision culminates in the end time, not the days of Antiochus, 200 years before Christ came to earth!

So our conclusion can only be that “the abomination of desolation” spoken of by Daniel the prophet, still in the future when Jesus spoke about it, refers not to any episode in the life of Antiochus Epiphanes, but to the end of all time, as demanded by the angel Gabriel and the “Man” who commanded the message.

- 147.5 million Americans claim affiliation with a religious group

- 94% of those who claim affiliation are members of Christian or quasi-Christian denominations

Every culture offers every opportunity for evaluation on the part of the individual as to whether the spiritual beliefs which that culture encompasses are spiritual beliefs that are comfortable for the individual living within it; it is a matter of conscious choice on the part of every individual in every lifetime to decide for themselves whether the doctrine that is being taught – the doctrine that is predominant throughout the culture – is a doctrine that ‘rings true’ for their inner self.

In many cases, individuals have found that the doctrine advocated by the Christian sect which constituted their upbringing did not ‘pass the test’ of meeting the requirements for being the spiritual foundation on which their lives were based, and – as a result – many individuals have turned their backs on the Christian faith that dominates their society. In some areas, a ‘cold war’ has been declared, with Christians condemning free thinkers as ‘false prophets of God’ and free thinkers condemning Christians as ‘narrow-minded and judgmental.’

From both directions, this separationist attitude is inappropriate and against the Universal Law of Acceptance, which recognizes both the right and the responsibility of every individual to live their life according to their own personal truth. In an all too human need to justify our negative attitudes towards each other, both sides prefer to focus into the ‘negative aspects’ of the other’s belief system. We can only bridge the gap if we are willing to move beyond our emotional need to feel that ‘we are right and they are wrong’ and come to recognize and respect the positive aspects of all belief systems – including Christianity.

Modern society has a tendency to ‘categorize’ groups of people by race or religion. We seldom take the time to look beneath the surface to explore the differences that make for individual truth within an umbrella spiritual foundation. We may unwittingly judge others simply as “Christians,” using our limited exposure to one or two sects as our justification for our belief that “Christians are narrow-minded” or “Christians are anti-New Age.” This is the equivalent of someone deciding that anyone who believes in God is “just like the Muslims” or “just like the Wiccans” or “just like the Universalists.” If we truly want to create a world where people live together in harmony, then we must begin with the basics, and one of those basics is not only understanding but accepting belief systems that are different from our own.

Because we have chosen to be a part of a culture in which Christianity IS the primary spiritual foundation, it is our responsibility to know enough truth – as opposed to personal expression – about Christianity to deny or confirm its place in our spiritual foundation. Too often, we have allowed extremists to stand in the way of our personal pursuit of spirituality through the Christian belief system; our emotional response to those who judge anyone who thinks differently than they do is a major obstacle to peaceful co-existence. Both factors say, “Judge not, lest ye be judged.” Both factors DO judge the other as ‘wrong.’ On both sides, we are not living according to what we say we believe: our actions and our attitudes are in direct conflict with our words.

There is a common bond that neither side recognizes: there is no such things as “a Christian,” anymore than there is such a thing as “a new-ager.” The strength of the Christian religion (and 1.5 billion adherents world-wide – one in three adults in the world – DOES constitute strength!) lies not in a passive acceptance of doctrine as it has been taught by the Church over the centuries, but in a continual need on the part of the followers to break away from the predominating belief system and ‘find and follow their own truth.’ Depending on the source you turn to, there are between 200 and 1000 Christian sects registered in this country alone.

Such diversity in beliefs has not been accomplished passively, and the reception to the changes advocated by each budding denomination was similar to – but much more intense than – the reception being given by the ‘core Christians’ to those free thinkers who are seeking a new truth that will, inevitably, threaten the position of the core. It has been – and will continue to be – an ongoing cycle, a cycle that is not exclusive to the Christian faith.

Every major religion in the world experiences this cycle, in which a basic truth on which the religion is built serves as the catalyst for spiritual evaluation on the part of the followers, and – inevitably – the catalyst goes in one of two directions: either an individual agrees with the truth offered, and “follows,” or disagrees, and “leads” in a new direction toward a new truth. This cycle of spiritual evaluation and confirmation is the purpose of organized religion: like most other elements of life on the physical plane, it is a learning tool, but it is useless if we are not willing to use it as the tool it was intended to be by thinking about the truth it offers and comparing it to our own instead of ignoring it as ‘inappropriate to our needs.’

The order of God’s universe is evident everywhere, and the cycles through which the learning process takes place are always the same, following the pattern established when the souls split into multi-dimensional aspects and ‘left the whole’ (God) in pursuit of truth. They have gone off in innumerable directions as they experience on innumerable levels of existence, and it is only when they all return from the deviations of truth, and their learning process has been accomplished, that they all agree that Universal Law is truth, and they become a Whole again.

So it is with religion: every major religion in the world begins with a premise that is offered as truth, and every soul involved in that culture must either accept that truth or ‘go off in their own direction.’ What is evident in the self can always be expanded outward, and just as we as individuals pursue our own truth, so groups (or churches, or religions) pursue theirs. Eventually, we all end up in the same place, recognizing that Universal Law is the root of all religion, and the doctrines which any individual chooses to apply to express that Universal Law within their own life is purely a matter of conscious choice.

No small part of the transition currently taking place is a need within the group consciousness to ‘get back to’ the point from which we started: recognizing that Universal Law is the root of every major belief system on the planet, and the only difference between ‘what you believe’ and ‘what I believe’ is the way we choose to express our spirituality on a daily basis. We have all become lost in the doctrine of the various religions – including Christianity – and as a result we have failed to see that the REAL core truth around which the various religions have been built is Universal Law.

It’s no wonder that those who have chosen to express their spirituality outside of the Christian community are often confused as to what Christianity really is; we should take the time to realize that many Christians feel the same way. There are a bewildering number of Christian sects, each working independently of the next, and each confirming, through their very existence, that Christianity has played a major role over the past two thousand years in providing the ‘core truth’ against which each generation within each culture has sought to find their own truth. If we are willing to look at the Christian religion objectively, instead of feeling threatened by it, then we will see it for the diverse religious organization that it is, and respect that diversity as a perfect example of willingness to go against the popular conception of ‘truth’ to express the personal relationship with God in a new and different way.

Life – and the learning processes that comprise it – follows a natural sequence, and the spiritual growth sequence offered through the 2000 year history of the Christian religion is one that leads to culmination in ‘one truth for all,’ recognizing Universal Law as the framework on which life should be built. Contrary to the popular Christian perception that this “one world religion” will be a “false religion” that will lead people away from Christ, the recognition of Universal Law as the core truth on which all religions are structured will not change anything. We will always have a diversity of religions, through which individuals will explore their spirituality in a way that is comfortable for them and that agrees with their ‘inner truth’ about how that spirituality should be expressed. The only thing that will change is the level of acceptance with which each religion views the others, and it is the lack of that level of acceptance that stands in the way of practical co-existence now.

The purpose of any religion is to open the door to a higher awareness of the role that God intended them to play in life, and a higher understanding of the way God intended life to be. Christ taught Universal Law, but through the centuries, many of Christ’s teachings have been twisted, and it is disagreement within the Christian community as to ‘what teachings were twisted when’ which has historically been the driving force behind the establishment of new sects.

I would remind you of a basic thought that is too often lost in the doctrine today, and that is that there was no ‘Christian church’ during Christ’s lifetime. Christ chose not to teach in the synagogues; instead, he taught informally, sitting on the grass, or standing on a mountain, or sitting in someone’s house, and it was the followers of Christ who established the Church and in turn established the doctrine that would govern that church. The Catholic Church – and I would remind you that the Latin phrase for ‘universal’ is ‘catholic’ – was the original Christian church, and the majority of individuals within the first one hundred years after the death of Christ were a very loose congregation of individuals who saw the church as an opportunity for fellowship and interactions with other followers of Christ’s teachings, much as today’s seekers congregate loosely in their personal pursuit of truth.

Having been born into a culture in which Christianity is the predominant religion, we cannot hope to come to terms with our own spiritual foundation unless we are willing to work with the learning tool that Christianity provides when it serves as the catalyst for confirmation of our own belief structure. We must be willing to move our focus away from those ‘die-hard’ individuals who fear change in any form, and focus, instead, into following the example of those who have come before us, and drawn their own conclusions regarding spiritual truth in spite of Christian majority within the culture, and in doing so, we must come to respect the fact that – as evidenced within the diverse nature of what is all too casually referred to as ‘the Christian community’ – the past two centuries have been witness to drastic changes within ‘the church’ as generation after generation has done what it is that we are hoping to accomplish. They have explored, and they have found a different truth, and they have suffered and died in their efforts to live by that truth.

There is much to be learned about ‘finding and following your own path in life’ by exploring the history of Christianity. Take responsibility. Study. Evaluate. Find your own truth, for it is only in doing so that you can objectively explore the entity Jesus Christ and the role, if any, he plays in your belief system.