The God Box

9 05 2009

A question I usually confront myself with when assessing my religious views is, “What is my God box?” What is a God box? A God box is an individual’s current image of God and everything that God is.  For instance, a simple example would be a God in a toga, who looks like Zeus and lounges on top of a cloud throwing lightning bolts. This God answers your prayers and controls every facet of the universe. Many of us have shared this God box before.  Another God box would be “God is Love”.  In this image, God is more than just a concrete being. He transcends reality and becomes a concept as well. Depending on how you say “God is Love”, this could be seen as a more mature God box. These two examples are what I meant by  ”God box”.

My God box is constantly under evaluation, constantly evolving. Currently I see God as many things: He is the omnipotent father of all things, He is the historical/spiritual Jesus, and It is a spiritual entity that is nebulous in nature and can only be described by what It is not. This could be referred to as the Trinity. My God box is meshed with the concepts and realities of Allah and Buddha, not because I extract what I like from each religion to make my own “cafeteria-style” religion, but because I see how they are the same.  I say He is Love, but I don’t say it like others usually do. My image of God is One who does not do what you ask of Him. He helps you, but not in the way you often want. His will is beyond our will, implemented on behalf of not only our own sakes but everything else’s.

The best way to describe it is the will of a doctor and the will of a patient. We ask the doctor to cure us of our ailments. He cuts us up, he tears things out, he gives us pills. We go through all this invasive treatment with promise of feeling better… and at the end of the day we still feel nauseous and dizzy. Our sutures burn with pain, our insides are roiling inside of us, and the adverse effects of the medication makes us feel even worse. “How does this make me feel better?” the patient asks. The patient and the doctor shared the same goal in curing an ailment, but there was a difference in wills. The patient’s will was to be comfortable. To FEEL better. The doctor’s was to actually fix the problem. The patient was looking for instant gratification while the doctor was addressing the immediate medical priority AND the long term health of the patient. The doctor’s will may not be immediately inherent, but when you stand back and look at what all is going on and also realize that he is not just diagnosing you but hundreds of others don’t you think that what the doctor provided the patient was ultimately more beneficial than what was asked for? Trying to keep myself from writing a novel of a blog, this is the best I can describe what I see God as right now. There’s so much more to God than what I can describe at any point in time.

That’s what determines the scope of my God box: my ability to intuit God. My God box only exists to break God into digestible, bite-size pieces. It’s like a television, which is only capable of showing you what is able to fit onto film. What you see on the screen implies so much more, but you are not able to experience it in its entirety. As time passes, my God box seems to grow bigger and bigger to accomodate for my rapidly expanding image of God, and with each passing evaluation He becomes harder to contain into a box. My God box becomes more strained as I stretch it out. So what is going to happen when it reaches it’s limit? Is it going to halt in it’s tracks? Or is it going to split at the seams and bottom out? Is it going to be too much for me and I’ll just give up on it all? The problem becomes more than just being able to find out what God is. It also becomes an issue of preparing myself to experience more of what He is. It becomes an issue of my integrity as a vessel for God.

And after all that is said and done, after we have established a God box…what does it matter? What was it’s purpose? All we did was construct an image of Him, we never found Him. Wasn’t the God box constructed to help us see God in His entirety? How does it do that by cutting it into pieces? How does it help us see the big picture when all it is capable of doing is showing us a small window into what God is? How can we know who God is by making up our own idea of Him? One thing we must be aware of when constructing this God box is that what we see in it IS NOT GOD. It is our projections that we place onto what we believe God is. What we see in the God box we are more than willing to name God Himself. As DeMello said in Awareness, “people fall into idolatry because they think that where God is concerned, the word is the thing.” We construct a description of who we think God is then we fall into the rut of worshipping that, forgetting that it was only a guess at who He is. DeMello wrote about how he was confronted by a world-renowned scripture scholar. “It never struck me that I had been an idol worshipper all my life! My idol was not made of wood or metal; it was a mental idol.” DeMello reminded his readers that those that had constructed their own mental idol were the more dangerous idol worshippers because “they used a very subtle substance, the mind to produce their God.”

Maybe I was never meant to contain God in a box. Maybe I wasn’t meant to contain Him within me, this body serving as a Temple. How could all of what God is be within me? Maybe I’ve been using the wrong word this whole time. I’m not a vessel, I’m a conduit. I am a channel through which He flows through. Right now, the God box seems irrelevant. My experience and my ideas of God right now have surpassed any words that I am capable of expressing right now.  Right now it doesn’t feel like I could fit what I’m feeling inside a box and I’m all the better for it.


Actions

Information

6 responses

9 05 2009
calliopespen

Wonderful post. Your analogy of the patient doctor relationship is one that I will share with my children–they will understand the message when relayed in this way:)

I was fascinated by the glimpse you gave us into your inner world and your efforts to define God. This comment piqued my interest:

“It is a spiritual entity that is nebulous in nature and can only be described by what It is not.”

In your opinion, other than a mental construct, what is he/she/It not? Curious:)

“My God box is meshed with the concepts and realities of Allah and Buddha, not because I extract what I like from each religion to make my own “cafeteria-style” religion, but because I see how they are the same.”
YES–I absolutely agree with this…and I can’t understand how/why humankind continues to wage wars and commit hateful acts “in the name of God.” It’s appalling, perplexing and frightening that we have perverted religion to justify war and hate.

Took a glimpse at your reading list as well…highly recommend the Tao Te Ching, if you haven’t already read it…it’s magnificent:)

I’ll end my comment here…I could go on and on…very passionate about this subject…

Thanks for a great post:)

9 05 2009
spoonman09

Thank you! Actually, yes, I have read Tao Te Ching. Most of the things on my list are books I’ve already read and want to share with others. I’m due for another run through the Tao though…

I’ve never really been able to describe exactlyl what God is not. I’ve just been able to respond to questions. I CAN say that God isn’t somebody that does what we ask Him to. I think it’s rather rude to make expectations of Him like that. God isn’t in the defense of any person in particular. He is not the fluffy, feel good guy we know and love 100% of the time. There is a plan there that we can’t understand and we can try to understand that plan all we want but that won’t really make a difference other than to sate our curiosity. God does not command you to love Him or worship Him. He loves you all the same. It would be nice if you did, though. He is not JUST what you read of in the Bible. He’s so much more, so don’t hold the Bible for absolute authority. Think for yourself and love Him for Him and not because something told you to. Don’t do it for the incentive of Heaven. Do it because you want to. Those are just my thoughts.

Somewhere I think I wrote a blog on religious war. I don’t remember, though, haha.

Please go on and on. I’d love to read it.

10 05 2009
calliopespen

Hmmm..so you still personify God as a he? Not asking for the sake of gender, asking for the sake of identification with either a “force” or a “person.” Just curious;) How do you integrate Tao with God? Are they separate? The same? No judgement here, just curiosity:) I can be a real pain, huh? Just very happy to see somebody writing about this NOT from a position or “real authority”—somebody who knows absolute answers are elusive and doesn’t fall back on religious dogma. Very refreshing.

As for your reading lists…have you read The Four Agreements? You might enjoy it. It’s a much different read than Karen Armstrong (who is brilliant in my opinion)…and speaking of Armstrong, The Spiral Staircase is an excellent book as well. As for the Tao Te Ching–365 Tao is also a good book–one of those you would keep on your nightstand:)

Happy to have made your acquaintance!

10 05 2009
calliopespen

Hmmm..so you still personify God as a he? Not asking for the sake of gender, asking for the sake of identification with either a “force” or a “person.” Just curious;) How do you integrate Tao with God? Are they separate? The same? No judgement here, just curiosity:) I can be a real pain, huh? Just very happy to see somebody writing about this NOT from a position or “real authority”—somebody who knows absolutel answers are elusive and doesn’t fall back on religious dogma. Very refreshing.

As for your reading lists…have you read The Four Agreements? You might enjoy it. It’s a much different read than Karen Armstrong (who is brilliant in my opinion)…and speaking of Armstrong, The Spiral Staircase is an excellent book as well. As for the Tao Te Ching–365 Tao is also a good book–one of those you would keep on your nightstand:)

Happy to have made your acquaintance!

11 05 2009
spoonman09

I refer to God as He in conversations because it’s easier to talk about Him with others that way. People have grown up seeing God as a man, including me, so it’s more comfortable to refer to Him that way. I can’t always expect others to understand that He’s not just a personified man. I could take the time to qualify every time I refer to God as He but most of the times it wouldn’t be relevant to the conversation and would water it down with minutia…also, it’s just easier to relate to and love something when it shares some qualities with you :) .

I relate Tao with God by noticing the relative effortlessness in the nature of things. Things are only complicated because we choose to make them that way. It only seems like God makes it complicated because we want to blame somebody else for our own projections. The will of God is elaborate in its design, at least to us, but it manifests itself in the simplest of ways. We think that putting things in black and white makes things simple, but when we polarize things like that we begin to limit our options to only one or the other. In my opinion, when you’re forced to make a decision between a limited amount of options of which none quite fit what you’re looking for, then things get complicated. What God and nature have provided us with is an infinite amount of possibilities, not options.

Have you heard of the manhole principle? It’s the principle that God is like a worker in a manhole. You never see him there, but he’s always working underground. He works on the boring stuff, the background, the infrastructure, the plumbing, the skeleton of our foundation. The foundation is the single most important of our construction but it is the least noticed because it is beneath us, underneath the asphalt. God does all that and He doesn’t ask for recognition or love or anything in return. He just does it. He does His own thing and lets us do ours. Just let the nature of things work out. It can run so smoothly on its own that maybe there wasn’t even a stimulus. Maybe God never did any of this. It seems too spontaneous yet self sufficient at times to be the work of intelligent design. Maybe all it really was was just an intelligent being recognizing and appreciating something as simple as the way things are.

And the three books that you spoke of I haven’t read yet. I’ll change that soon :)

11 05 2009
calliopespen

Good stuff:) And love the manhole principle as well!

Leave a comment