Finding God: To Believe or Not to Believe

Along the relatively short path of human existence our species has embraced religion, atheism, and science. Few will undertake the difficulty in understanding the history of their own particular religion and to be able to find truth and objectivity in published material about this subject is a monumental task unto itself. Then, if one tries to integrate orthodox religious dogma with the aspects of 20th and 21st century physics it is no wonder that many have chosen to step backwards and reinforce the beliefs of a time when there was much less confusion or ambiguity - before TheAge of Enlightenment in the 1800s. This book ponders life and death experiences and includes my own near death experience (NDE). I chose to present many questions about the realm of our existence, and stress the importance of promoting positive aspects of humanity without exclusionary elements of human prejudice that foster hate and divisiveness.

Finding God: To Believe or Not to Believe delves into the formation and history of Christianity and the role of the ruling class which combined a Church/State series of governing throughout the last seventeen hundred years. It follows hundreds of centuries of the practice of the God/King rulers. Tracing back the origin and use of the Bible from the its inception as ordered by King Constantine in the 4^th Century, this book shares how it changed over hundreds of years to the present day version of the King James Edition.

One should note Christianity, as a worldwide religion throughout human existence, accounts for a small percentage of all religions practiced by humans. But to bring in all the elements of its history was not the purpose of this book. Christianity, as a whole, is the most influential religion and contains the highest percentage of practitioners in the United States of America and most of Europe. Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, and a few other sects are discussed, but the book's purpose is to show the extreme positions of non-believers to devout believers in contemporary modern society. It is not intended to judge ultimate positions of belief as right or wrong. The actions of any such organized religions which interpret their Holy Books as calling for human destruction speak volumes on their own. The actions of those intransigent in their beliefs are documented and explored alongside recent philosophical thought and many theories concerning modern scientific analysis of theoretical physics. The two fields can be closely related when projecting what connotates the notion of relative reality existing in our universe.

Finding God: To Believe or Not to Believe is merely one human's perspective and life experiences I am sure will mirror many other beings on this planet. To answer the question "why?" we must begin to understand who we are and what our limitations are. To be so arrogant as to have all the answers is the beginning of any normal human exclusionary, and possibly violent, action against those who would do harm in order to force others to believe as they do. No sword or bullet will convince any fanatic to change their mind. However, the defining point for a fanatic is a relative term in this world. Those who do nothing to stop this behavior can be just as guilty as the fanatic they allow to perpetuate such violence by tacit approval. The following is from a speech made by a very conservative man in 1981 in the United States Senate Chambers:

On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this Supreme Being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.

I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."

That man was Senator Barry Goldwater from Arizona.

We have come so far as a species and it is pure folly to allow it all to crumble for the failure to agree to disagree over a subject with no empirical data either way. The choice to move on is ours alone, one person at a time.

All of this being said on such a heady subject, I have tried to write this in a non-scholarly, at times humorous and hopefully interesting, but easily digestible way. I'm sure there will be some indigestion occurring with those who will remain opposed to logical thought, irrational fear, and immovable theology. Bon appétit to those of diverse palates.