This the fourth and last part of a my response to a reader’s questions that were sparked from reading Thoughts on God: Ending Religion’s ‘Eminant Domain’on the Idea. His questions are indented and displayed in blue.
It is strange because I am not against porn per say but there are these nagging questions such as; is it ok to have sex for money now that this person is of legal age? Does this magic number of legal consent suddenly make all of the abuse as a child worthwhile?
It may be better to ask ourselves is having sex for money a valid reason to disrespect or even disdain another human spirit? If love lives within all, and all are creators, then the potential exists that light can touch anyone at any place in consciousness when they encounter someone who is joyful in their beingness. There are many people who are well respected by all outward appearances, and are yet prisoners of false perception, thinking they must maintain appearances of happiness or wealth, or “better than” the Jones, while being miserable within their self. I’d rather be who I am, and love it rather than be who others think I should be, and hate myself for bending to their expectations.
Does this make the trauma go away and thereby validate the now adults divinity?
Trauma will go away with love, and as an abused child may have chose their catalyst in the abuse, it is just as likely that he or she will have chosen another who would eventually demonstrate the liberating light of love. The abuse is not chosen for one simply to stay in an abused frame of mind. It represents a self-selected challenge to be conquered along the journey to remembering, and then becoming who we are. And yet, being in an abused frame of mind doesn’t make One any less divine, or make one any less worthy of love. The question is whether they will be accepting of love that is offered, and then, will they reciprocate.
At some point I believe we must ask ourselves what it means to be fully human. What does it mean to embrace and as you would say balance our spiritual and animal natures.
I agree totally, that’s what my explorations have been about, and it is ongoing. In spite of old teaching, I don’t see ourselves needing to balance spiritual and animal natures. That (the animal nature) is part and parcel of dualistic thinking. The only nature we need to embrace and hold on to, is our loving one. We are not our body. We simply express ourselves in this reality through it. Its health and energy is a reflection of the health of our thinking, doing, and being. When we accept that oneness with God defines our human beingness, we’ll have a clue as to our heritage, and our future.
Thanks for the dialog.
You too!
