- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Tam Hunt: ‘Avatar,’ Blue Skin and the Ground of Being
A recent New York Times columnist described James Cameron’s latest blockbuster, Avatar, as a “long apologia for pantheism.” This is, we learn as we read further, a bad thing.
Pantheism is the notion that the entire universe is God. Pantheism is generally relegated by modern theologians and scholars to an earlier, less advanced, stage of humanity, with a less well-developed notion of divinity. But the Na’vi people of Avatar’s moon, known as Pandora, may well hold the more accurate — and ultimately more helpful — notion of divinity after all.
Since the days of Thomas Aquinas, Theism is the basis for most of Christian faith (although what defines Christian faith in the many hundreds of different Christian traditions is itself rather hard to pin down). Aquinas was a 13th-century Italian monk who wrote the authoritative text for Christianity in his era, Summa Theologica. This work remains highly influential today. The basic tenets of traditional theism hold that there is one God and the universe is His creation. God and the universe are separate. God is eternal and uncreated. The universe is created and will one day end — rather soon, according to some of the more fiery theologians.
Pantheism, to the contrary, holds that God and the universe are one: it’s all the same stuff. Pantheism doesn’t necessarily require that there be only one god, and the more “primitive” versions of pantheism view the world as containing a multiplicity of gods. Einstein, not exactly an intellectual scrub, subscribed to Spinoza’s pantheistic God. Spinoza, a 17th-century Dutch Jew, stated that “matter and soul are the outside and inside aspects, or attributes, of one and the same thing in itself ...; that is to say, of ‘Nature, which is the same as God.’” (Spinoza’s Ethics, 1677).
As with most things in real life, there are more than two flavors possible. In this case, in between traditional theism and pantheism is panentheism, described by one scholar as “the god of the philosophers.” Panentheism — the extra “en” being very important — holds that the universe is within God but not identical with God. So all of the universe is God, but God transcends the physical universe. Modern proponents of panentheism include the British philosopher and physicist Alfred North Whitehead, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Charles Hartshorne. And, of course, Hinduism has taught a version of panentheism for many thousands of years, based on the Vedas and Upanishads, which were first written about 1800 BCE. In Hinduism, Brahman is the ultimate ground of being, what some describe as God.
This takes us back to Avatar’s blue-skinned Na’vi. Cameron’s epic depicts a far-flung moon inhabited by a humanoid race that enjoys a tight bond with nature. This bond can at times be physical, due to a bio-psychic link that allows the Na’vi to literally connect with the global living network they describe as Eywa, by using open nerve endings at the end of their long ponytails. Eywa, a global network consisting of all life on Pandora, is a clear parallel to Hinduism’s Brahman. Brahman is the source of all things. It is the soil from which every other thing grows.
And the Na’vi’s blue skin is a clear parallel to Krishna, Hinduism’s Christ-like figure. Krishna is always depicted with blue skin. Krishna stars in such epics as the Bhagavad Gita, one of the primary books of the Hindu tradition. The third indication that Cameron intentionally mirrored Hindu teachings is the name of the movie itself. In Hinduism, an avatar is an earthly incarnation of a god, such as Krishna.
We realize, then, that Avatar does not really describe pantheism; rather, it describes a panENtheistic way of life, made very real for its people due to the actual physical connections the Na’vi enjoy with Eywa.
Avatar, as with all movies, is a metaphor. The metaphor in this case is complex and of course open to interpretation. My personal interpretation is that the Na’vi’s ability to interconnect with Eywa and download the collective wisdom of all life on Pandora is a metaphor for every human’s ability to connect with the ground of being and enjoy that same kind of wisdom.
Ross Douthat, the New York Times columnist who decried Avatar’s alleged pantheism, apparently disapproves of the movie’s religious message, based on his conclusion that this message contradicts Christian teachings. This, however, misses the true meaning of Jesus’ life and message. Interpreting exactly what Jesus’ life and message really were, however, is a veritable cottage industry in this new millennium. Two recent books have been helpful for me in gaining a better understanding of Jesus and situating his teachings within the broader context of universal spiritual truth: Deepak Chopra’s The Third Jesus and Bart Ehrman’s Jesus, Interrupted.
These books and many others demonstrate that we may accurately interpret Jesus’ teachings as harmonious with the Hindu teachings of Brahman and Atman. Jesus claimed to be God, according to the Gospel of John (interestingly, the only gospel that contains this teaching). Jesus’ claim was considered heretical by not only the Jewish authorities of his day, but also the Roman oppressors. For this and other crimes, he was crucified.
To a Hindu, however, the realization that each of us is God is greeted with a hearty congratulations — “welcome to reality!” This is the case because the core teaching of Hinduism — particularly the Vedanta tradition — is that not only is Brahman the ground of being for all things, but that all things constitute a nondual oneness. It’s all just one thing. And when we realize it’s all just one thing, we realize also that we are that one thing. I am the universe, you are the universe, we are the universe. I am God, you are God, we are God.
For Jesus to say he is God is not, then, such a stretch. In fact, it becomes rather pedestrian. But it is a pedestrian truth that all of us should internalize and live, each day. Paul Tillich, a 20th-century German theologian, has written extensively on a similar interpretation of Christian faith.
When we realize that all other people are in fact just pieces of the grand oneness that is us, Brahman, the ground of being, it becomes a lot harder to treat each other inhumanely. And the same realization leads to a renewed reverence for the natural world — because the natural world is just another manifestation of our true identity, the entire universe. And this is, ultimately, a very Christian teaching.
— Tam Hunt is a Santa Barbara attorney.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use
» on 01.17.10 @ 10:29 AM
Thanks for explaining a Hindu viewpoint on nature and deity. Very interesting. Jesus said that no one comes to God except through him. (John 14:6). Saying that this particular teaching fits into “universal spiritual truth” doesn’t work. I find that Christianity is very exclusive. Other spiritual systems teach that I can do things or realize certain things to become spiritually free, while Christianity teaches that there is nothing I can do except to turn away from trying to get there myself and to allow Jesus to bring me that freedom. I would like everyone to agree and get along and be unified, but I don’t see that different world religions can be reconciled to the exclusive teachings of Jesus.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.17.10 @ 03:05 PM
This is a fascinating article and one which explores the many facets of what I have, for a long while, called the
‘oneness of being’. For the first half of my life I searched in vain for ‘Jesus’ but was never sucessful. It was not until the well covered aspects of ‘Cosmic Life’, as in this article, became more clear to me, that I felt I had spiritually arrived. So thank you Tam Hunt for a very illuminating piece.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.18.10 @ 10:53 PM
First, you correctly separate and describe the mutual exclusivity of Judeo-Christian belief vs. Panthesm:
“The basic tenets of traditional theism (Judeo-Christian) hold that there is one God and the universe is His creation. God and the universe are separate. God is eternal and uncreated. The universe is created and will one day end — rather soon, according to some of the more fiery theologians.
Pantheism, to the contrary, holds that God and the universe are one: it’s all the same stuff.”
Then you conclude by contradicting yourself:
“the natural world is just another manifestation of our true identity, the entire universe. And this is, ultimately, a very Christian teaching.”
No it isn’t!
Jews and Christians to NOT identify themselves or the Earth as a just part of God, but a separate creation of God. WE ARE NOT GOD! What egos we must have to assume such a thing. This would be blasphemy to a Jew and his the whole reason they reject Christ, who claimed to be God. Christians only accept Christ as divine and the Son of God. Divinity does not extend to the Earth and its mortal sinful inhabitants! The world is a creation, not a “manifestation of our identity”.
But it feels good with a sigh of relief to believe such because if we are on par with God, we do not have to be accountable for our evil deeds, because, we are GOD right? That is exactly what the original sin was - Adam and Eve ate the apple because Satan told them they would be like God. Tam has eaten the apple and wants to lead others to do the same - the very false teachings warned about by Christ.
Tam is suggesting the very thing warned about in Romans 1:24,25 worshiping and serving the creation instead of the Creator.
24Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
If you want to pretend you know something that you obviously know nothing about, Tam, back it up with the words of Christ, from the Bible, not the false teachings of Deepak Chopra or Bart Ehrman! Because His words are in direct conflict with your understanding!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.19.10 @ 11:17 AM
Dear Rubbish, I urge you to read Chopra’s and Ehrman’s books before passing judgment. I also highly recommend Paramahansa Yogananda’s The Second Coming of Christ: The Resurrection of Christ Within You.
As you surely know, interpreting religious doctrine is an inexact science. The Bible itself, as we learn from numerous analyses over the centuries, is very much a work of man, as evidenced by its numerous contradictions between books and even within books, its evolution over time as it was translated into different languages, and the fact that even the earliest gospel (Mark) was written about 30 or so years after Christ died.
More generally, and more to my point about panentheism being compatible with Christ’s teachings, is the fact that Christ was clearly a great spiritual seeker, scholar and leader. When he claims to BE God, he is continuing in the long tradition of attaining cosmic consciousness, the realization that all things are one and we are that oneness. We can read his words, even through the invervening millennia and distorting lens of religious dogma, and see this truth. We can also read other gospels, such as the Gospel of Thomas (one of the Gnostic Gospels) and receive more affirmation of Jesus’ understanding of his true identity. And when we compare this understanding to the experiences of mystics in many other traditions, including Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Sufism, etc., we realize that this experience is itself universal. Hence my use of the term “universal spiritual teachings.”
Last, I’d recommend you read Shankara’s Crest Jewel of Discrimination, an 8th Century text that is the primary text for Advaita (nondual) Vedanta, one of the primary Hindu traditions. Alan Watts has also written some great books explaining Vedanta and Buddhist thinking on the nature of the self and cosmic consciousness.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.20.10 @ 11:01 AM
Dear Tam -
I urge you to read and STUDY the BIBLE before passing judgment. Despite the numerous authors and books written over the span of more than 2000 years, you will find a very consistent theme of creation, mans fall from grace, forgiveness and salvation. Nowhere will you find that man is “one” with God. Quite the opposite, we are separated from God because of sin, disobedience to God, the reason Adam was turned out of the garden of Eden. We need forgiveness and redemption, a free gift achieved only through belief in the redemption of Christ to even be able to face God.
You can discount and mold and twist the Bible anyway you see fit, but the truth remains. It means exactly what it says. Quote me some scriptures to support your argument, otherwise it means nothing to a Christian that believes the Bible is Truth.
If you want to believe that Jesus was “merely” a great spiritual “seeker, scholar and leader.” Then why don’t you believe what He says? Nowhere does he say WE are God, he only makes this claim for himself. I and the Father are one. Not “all of you” or “we” and the Father are one.
We are separated from God by sin. Before approaching God, or before claiming to be “one” or on par with Him, YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR SIN! No other religion claims this. No other religion claims that salvation (nirvana, heaven, enlightenment whatever you want to call the goal) is a gift, but rather something we must work for.
Are you, Tam, being “one with God”, able to perform miracles, healings, resurrections from the dead? Do you have power over nature as Jesus did when he calmed the storms? Can you transfigure yourself? Can you change water into wine? Can you make the blind see? Can you heal a man’s withered hand? Would you be willing to endure extreme suffering, give your life, as sacrifice for the sins of the world because of your perfect love for humankind? Quite an ego you have.
Read just one gospel (Matthew, Mark, Luke or John) and come back and tell us how Jesus was just like one of us or merely a teacher and scholar. Or tell us how the Bible is just a storybook written by men (as if the other references you cite were not?). The Bible is an inspired writing inspired by God and protected over the centuries, despite all of the hatred against it and attempts to ban it and destroy it.
One lie you propagate, is that the Bible “evolved over time” as it was translated into different languages. Umm we do still have the original manuscripts to consult for accuracy, and scores of scholars who do. If anything, the translations have evolved to be more ACCURATE over time, in case you did not know. The fact that it was written 30 years later is not an issue. People do have memories that span this period of time. There are four accounts written by four different authors at different places and times, that are amazingly consistent. They are consistent with other accounts of history at the time.
Might I recommend “The Case for Faith” and “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel an investigative reporter.
Another passage from the same chapter of Romans describes you and the “teachers” that you cite rather well: (My emphasis added)
Romans 1:20
20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the CREATION of the world, in the things that have been made [created]. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but THEY BECAME FUTILE IN THEIR THINKING, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 CLAIMING TO BE WISE THEY BECAME AS FOOLS , 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.20.10 @ 03:12 PM
The posting by Rubbish is aptly named given the content of the posting is also Rubbish. It is certainly a predisposed argument free of dispassion. The argument that we need an external force to do or be “good” is disturbing at all levels.
The original article by Mr. Hunt, on the other hand is illuminating.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.20.10 @ 08:15 PM
It is easy to say that an argument is rubbish but not so easy to say why, or argue against it, is it?
It is easy to put words in a person’s mouth and criticize, but not so easy to offer an argument, especially against the truth. Nothing I said was false regarding Christian beliefs. What Tam says is directly in conflict.
I did NOT say that “we need an external force to do or be “good” . You said that. God does not FORCE us to do or be good. He gives us free will, it is our choice, that is why so many are bad and do not do good. If he did force us to do good, there would be no bad, but obviously there is.
If we are part of God, or we ARE God and perfect and divine and all “one” as Tam suggests then how is evil explained? How can a perfect good being do harm to itself? Are you saying there is a force influencing people to be bad, but not one influencing them to do or be good? This God does by being a perfect example of love, even sending an example to dwell among us?
Certainly you can choose to be good without influence, but unfortunately, it’s not about being good or being bad. That is eating of the tree of good and evil.
Gen 2:16
16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, 17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”
To assume that simply doing good in general and not doing bad is going to get you where you want to go is simply wrong and the very thing that separates Christianity from other religions. Because nobody is perfectly good and up to God’s standards, other than Christ himself. None of us deserve forgiveness. Everyone of us has done an evil deed or two.
Romans 3:23
For there is no distinction: 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.
It is not by anything we have done, but rather by what God has done, that we become right with God. He sent his perfect Son to take the rap. We have the choice of repenting and accepting this gift or rejecting it.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.21.10 @ 04:09 PM
Dear Rubbish, the overwhelming message that Jesus taught is love. Love of self, love of others, love of God. Would a loving God really make believing in the figure of Christ the only path to redemption? In my mind: clearly not. Are all Jews doomed to damnation for not accepting Christ as their savior? Clearly not. Muslims? Clearly not. Etc.
There is a far better interpretation than you are advocating and this is that when Jesus says the only way to his Father is through him he means that the only way to peace and full realization is by understanding who we really are. We are, each of us, God, because all things are part of the unbroken wholeness constituting the universe and God. This is the universal teaching of all enlightened teachers. Indeed, to become enlightened simply means realizing that one is God. The difficulty then becomes maintaining that understanding and living that understanding. While I can know intellectually that I am God - and you also - it’s much harder to live always in such a way. We all fail, on a regular basis. This is what Christians call sin, but what is better described as ignorance (as Vedanta Hinduism describes it) or alienation or estrangement (as Huston Smith puts in his wonderful survey of the world’s religions). It is ignorance that causes us to act in selfish, petty, mean-spirited, envious, or cruel ways. By realizing our true selves we can rise above such behavior. Again, the difficulty is maintaining that lived understanding.
As far as direct Scripture goes, there is of course John 10: 34: “Ye are gods.” Jesus is in this passage quoting Psalm 82:6. This was Jesus’ response to a crowd of Jews getting ready to stone him, who accused him of blasphemy for claiming to be God. He responded, to paraphrase, “the scriptures themselves state that ‘ye are gods,’ so why is it blasphemy to say that I am a son of God?” Notice that I put “a” and not “the,” as is the case in the usual translation. “The” was used erroneously in the King James translation and has been used in more recent translations also. But when we look to the original text (I must trust translators on this because I don’t read ancient Greek), apparently Christ was saying simply that he was “a” son of God, and then saying (“ye are Gods”) that we all are sons of God.
John 17:21,22 also has some suggestive statements of Jesus on this theme.
It is also interesting to note that John is the only gospel in which Jesus claims to be God. John was apparently written much later than the other gospels (and obviously not by John himself, as is commonly believed). And, as you’ll learn if you read Ehrman’s “Jesus, Interrupted,” you’ll see that the accounts of Jesus’ life given in each of the gospels are in fact highly contradictory, not consistent, as you claim. This is one of many lines of evidence that demonstrate that the Bible is very much a work of man.
Last, it is up to each of us to find our own faith and belief system. I can’t tell you to what degree reason should be your guide in that process. That’s up to you also. But for me reason and faith should not be contradictory. A rational person will acknowledge that there are some things we simply can’t know, and thus must exercise faith in that area. But in traditional matters of faith, such as Christian doctrine, or any other religious doctrine, I prefer to have reason by my guide where it is applicable. And in matters of scriptural interpretation, reason is very much applicable. So if interpretations of scripture are unreasonable they don’t fit into my worldview and they shouldn’t fit into any rational person’s worldview. The task then is to create a rational interpretation, part of which I’ve outlined here, aided by many great hearts and minds such as Chopra, Erhman, Yogananda, Whitehead, etc.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.21.10 @ 08:03 PM
I’m sorry Tam but your explanation just doesn’t sound reasonable, though I appreciate the time you took to explain your point of view.
I can tell that your study of the Bible is shallow, since the New Testament scriptures were actually written in Greek and not Hebrew. You apparently have not studied the actual book or the religion, only what you have read or heard about it, and then you talk condescendingly to ME?
I do not know Greek, but I do have a Pastor who does. I know that no translations insert the “a” that you inserted. It is odd how you must rewrite scripture and adapt it to your beliefs, rather than deriving your beliefs from scripture.
You discount the accuracy so you can make it say what you want it to say, which fits your belief system rather than what it actually says. It says “ye are gods” (small case) not “ye are Gods” (Upper case)- there are many gods in the bible, many things people worship - from Bail to the Golden Calf - we worship celebrities, they are gods to us (small case) but none are the one true Triune God, the God of Abraham God the Creator. Yet all of these gods are sons of God because they are god’s children, his creation.
John 10:36
King James
I am THE Son of God (not A son of god)
New American Standard Version
I am THE Son of God
English Standard Version
I am THE Son of God
New International Version
I am God’s Son
American Standard Version
I am THE Son of God
He then goes on to say:
“If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; 38but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”
Does “realizing that you are God” give you the powers that Jesus had? Does it give you the ability to perform miracles? How do you account for them? You don’t like that part of the Bible so you dismiss it? Since you claim it is a work of man and not an inspired work of God, you are free to accept only what fits your belief system and reject the rest? I’m sorry but Christianity doesn’t work that way, it is fully based on the Bible being the inspired writings of God, you can’t pick and choose.
When you are in trouble and need help, do you pray to yourself? I feel sorry for you because you are missing out on a personal relationship with Christ, and therefore with God. You are missing experiencing his love and care and answers to prayer. You only have yourself, how lonely and powerless.
You say:
“It is also interesting to note that John is the only gospel in which Jesus claims to be God.”
NOT TRUE!
His claim to be God was the whole basis for his crucifixion, - blasphemy - accounted in all four gospels.
In Luke 22:66
When day came, the assembly of the elders of the people gathered together, both chief priests and scribes. And they led him away to their council, and they said, 67 “If you are the Christ, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I tell you, you will not believe, 68and if I ask you, you will not answer. 69But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” 70So they all said, “Are you the Son of God, then?” And he said to them, “You are right in saying that I am.” 71Then they said, “What further testimony do we need? We have heard it ourselves from his own lips.”
Mark 15 and Matthew 27:11 give similar accounts.
Please don’t attempt to redefine my religion to fit yours. It is quite offensive.
in John 10:34
I
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.21.10 @ 08:27 PM
“Dear Rubbish, the overwhelming message that Jesus taught is love. Love of self, love of others, love of God.”
TRUE!
“Would a loving God really make believing in the figure of Christ the only path to redemption? In my mind: clearly not. Are all Jews doomed to damnation for not accepting Christ as their savior? Clearly not. Muslims? Clearly not. Etc.”
Not only all Jews, and all Muslims but each and every one of us (Christians included) deserve nothing more than eternal damnation. God is perfect and therefore must be Just! How else would we respect Him? We have disobeyed and offended our creator in numerous ways, that is what the Old Testament is for - to show us exactly how we have sinned. We deserve nothing better than damnation.
But God is merciful and sent a sacrifice. It shows very much what a loving God he is to even give us this chance. It is as though we have gone to court and been convicted of murder and sentenced to life. Then Jesus steps in and says “I love this person, so I will pay the price in his stead”. All we need do is accept that gift. I would say it isn’t such a difficult thing to do, and more than fair. But God must be just if you don’t accept the sacrifice. Here is exactly what the Jesus says:
John 3:14
Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert[consistent theme from the Old Testament Numbers 21:9], so the Son of Man must be lifted up [resurrected], that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.
16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his ONE AND ONLY Son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
That’s exactly what this “teacher” says. You decide what it means. Or is that one of the parts of the Bible that you toss aside because it is not “reasonable”? what makes you think that an infinite God can be understood by a mortal mind?
The prophet Isaiah has some words for you:
16 You turn things upside down! Shall the potter be regarded as the clay,that the thing made should say of its maker,
“He did not make me”;
or the thing formed say of him who formed it,
“He has no understanding”?
How do you reconcile that with your beliefs? Isaiah just a man not a prophet I suppose. Ask a practicing Jew how he would feel about that.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 02.14.10 @ 06:41 PM
rubbish-
calm down and don’t be so self-righteous and conservative in your christianity. i dont care whether he said “a” or “the” because no matter what you say you have no way of knowing for sure except for a book written, as appropriately pointed out above, by men years after his death. the point here is if you look for the theme’s of jesus’s teachings, you will find consistent messages of love, forgiveness, acceptance, and compassion. these qualities are all greatly inspired by a perspective that acknowleges at least some sort of universal oneness. if not for a degree of universal oneness, there would be no foundation for morals like not hurting others. i believe christ, and to a certain extent modern christianity, has focused on these values. rubbish, if your argument is that we’re doomed to be sinners no matter what we do, it is you who deserves our pity. i don’t know about anyone else but i prefer to live life with the hope that i can trust myself to be more and more moral as i grow and mature. i was raised catholic, but if christianity is an attempt to make me believe i have no power to overcome evil on my own, i don’t want any part of it.
i think the problem here is that you, rubbish, like many religious conservatives, confuse normal, amazing human reflection with “a relationship with christ”. while i myself would find this connection fitting, as getting closer to christ would in my mind involve getting closer to universal oneness, i think that you completely eliminate the human aspect of salvation. jesus wasn’t trying to tell the world that if they say 5 hail mary’s and an our father before they die they will be saved forever. he was trying to tell us that salvation is active, it is universal, and it is totally accessible to all people through love. rubbish, and any other closed-minded religious fanatics, i only wish you would stop focusing so much on the negative reasons for believing in christ and instead think about living your life like jesus would have asked you to. he was a man himself, after all. my goal is to be no less a child of a panentheistic concept of god than jesus was. if that is anti-christian, then once again, i am happy to walk away…
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Bail Increased for Milpas Street Shooting Suspect
Vandenberg Postpones Test Launch of Unarmed Minuteman III Missile
Santa Barbara Police, Fire Proposed Budgets Mostly Status Quo for Next Fiscal Year
Department leaders present to the City Council their plans for handling high turnover and hiring new employees
Local Law Enforcement Officials Weigh In on Lowering DUI Threshold
National Transportation Safety Board recommends lowering blood-alcohol content from 0.08 to 0.05
Public Pays Price Tag for Sexually Violent Predator
Weather: Fair 66.0º
Search Noozhawk »
