The Problem with 'God'

I admit it – I have a problem with ‘God.’ I mean I have a problem with the word ‘God.’ This presents a bit of a dilemma when considering that I recently received the very clear message that I am here to serve God.

Even though I have been studying New Thought philosophy and Truth principles for nearly 25 years, I am still at times uncomfortable using the word. It simulates my embedded theology, which are the associations I have about ‘God’ from my years in traditional Christianity. When I hear the word ‘God,’ it immediately evokes concepts of duality, there is God and there is me. Even though I know that as Jesus said, [God] and I are one, there is something in me that does not quite own that.

When I think that I am here to serve God, I still get images of an external power that exerts control over me. While it is no longer my intellectualized understanding of ‘God,’ my mind conjures images of a being who blesses or curses according to “his” evaluation of good or bad behavior. Everything within me resists serving a willful, capricious deity.

I have thought of rewording my recent revelation. I considered changing “I am here to serve God” to “I am here to serve Creation,” or “I am here to serve Wholeness.” I tried them out, but neither resonates with me. I don’t know why I try! I have learned by experience over the years that it does not pay to mess with a message received from the Inner Knower, as I like to call it.

I find that I am left with the option of either no longer using the word ‘God,’ which doesn’t appear to be a viable option for me, or reconcile my past associations with ‘God’ with my current understanding and experience of ‘God’ as the Light/Life/Love from which all arises, in which all lives, and through which all is interconnected as one.

I am currently immersed in Philip Shepherd’s book Radical Wholeness. In the book, he explores the interconnectedness of all life and our ability to enter into conscious relationship with it by deeply connecting in our bodies. While he expounds on the ills that we have created in our lives - and lives of the planet and all its inhabitants - by being disconnected, he also offers a vision of a world that embodies wholeness. It is a vision of a world in which we recognize that we are part of the whole, and as such we make choices for the good of all, not just in our own self-interest or in the interest of power. In short, Shepherd presents a vision of a world which embodies love.

Shepherd does not use the word ‘God’ to denote this love, or the interconnectedness he refers to as ‘wholeness.’ Instead, he uses phrases, such as “web of life” or “unified field” or “universal intelligence.” Nevertheless, in the ways that he describes his concept of “wholeness,” he has provided me with a deeper understanding of and connection to some of the concepts that we in New Thought associate with our ideas about ‘God.’ For this and many other reasons, I highly recommend this book. I believe that what Shepherd offers in Radical Wholeness has the potential to be life-altering, for us individually, collectively as humanity and for all creation.

Here are some of the ways Shepherd describes “wholeness.” See if you do not see the correlation to how we in New Thought talk about God.

• Wholeness is unity. There is one, not two.
• Wholeness is coherent. It is without division. The harmony of the whole renders it coherent.
• The whole is implicit within each of its parts. Think of the ocean and wave analogy.
• The parts have no existence independent of the whole.
• Wholeness has no boundaries. Think of the description of God as a sphere whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere.
• The whole expends no effort. Think of the New Thought axiom that God has no volition.
• The whole abides in the Present. God is Omnipresence.
• The whole cannot be known. Objective knowledge cannot contain it or define it. The mind cannot grasps its magnitude.
• The whole can be felt. 

Shepherd outlines many other descriptors of wholeness, all of which could translate perfectly to describe what I believe about and experience of ‘God.’

My intention is to do my best to move through the embedded theology as it arises when I hear or use the word ‘God’ and relate instead to the concepts that Shepherd outlines in his book. Rather than attempting to get rid of the outdated mental images of ‘God’ and create a replacement image, I prefer to breathe into my body, feel the sensations that connect me with the whole, and experience ‘God’ first-hand. In doing that, I believe I am serving God.

I could rewrite my revelation to say something like, “I am here to serve the coherent, boundless, effortless unity which is implicit in all creation yet cannot be understood or named, but can be felt.” But, that would be too cumbersome. I’m sticking with “I am here to serve God.”