Why I Go Natural - at end of Part 2
Sunday, August 18, 2013
False Standards -
Dire Consequences
By
Francis William Bessler
Laramie, Wyoming
8/18/2013
I have been told a time or two in my life that I am “obsessed with myself” in that I insist on going natural - and often have my picture taken that way too. That is to say I prefer not to cover the natural as if clothing is somehow more worthy than the natural. For the life of me, I cannot understand why people actually consider clothing more worthy than the natural under it; but for argument sakes, let me agree. By going natural, I am expressing an “obsession with myself.” So what? So I am “obsessed with myself” with wanting to have so many pictures taken of me. So what? What does it hurt? And who am I hurting by doing so?
From my point of view, however, I am only trying to take pictures of a “willing” natural person. It just so happens that I am the only “willing” person around. Thus, I am somewhat limited to taking pictures of myself - or having pictures taken of me.
Ideally, however, I would like it if more people than can fit into a picture allowed themselves to be taken - au natural. The truth is that almost no one that I know wants to be taken. Ideally, I should not be the only one in my pictures. Ideally, both men and women should appear with me - au natural - because that is the Ideal in life - or what I see as the Ideal in life. The ideal should be that everyone is comfortable with what they are - not so much with who they are, but rather with “what” they are; but the truth is that almost no one is - comfortable with “what” they are. Are they? Are we?
But look around! What does all this “discomfort with life” mean? For the most part, it leads to dissatisfaction with life and that leads to all sort of destructive behavior. People who are dissatisfied with life think nothing of destroying it. It means nothing to them. So what does it matter if they destroy it - including themselves? What is war - but a lot of dissatisfied people going about shooting one another - or blowing one another up? For what reason - and for what useful objective?
If I were to be dissatisfied with life and take that dissatisfaction to arm myself with a gun - and then go out and shoot some other dissatisfied person, what have I gained? Tell me! What have I gained by being dissatisfied in the first place - and then taking that dissatisfaction out into the world, combating another dissatisfied person, and blowing him (or her) to “Hell”?
But why are people really dissatisfied with life? I think they are so because they have adopted false standards. What is a “false standard”? It is one that makes no sense. A false standard is one that is based on something that is not true - but oh, the harsh consequences of false standards!
False Standard # 1 -
Obedience to an External God
False standard # 1 is a standard that is based on the idea that God is separated from Life. That sense of separation leads to speculation that “maybe” it can happen that some might be able to attain unification with God - and from that “maybe,” all sort of variations in “doctrine” occur.
One doctrine offers that to be united with God, one has to “sacrifice” one of his herd to prove to God that one is willing to be obedient. Another doctrine has it that to be united with God, one has to treat all children of God the same in order to find favor with a God of all. Another doctrine states just the opposite - that only some can find favor with God because all are unequal in the eyes of God. Another doctrine arises that says that men must be willing to kill other human beings who have not recognized the “True God.” Another doctrine arises that says that to find God, one must deny all material goods of this world in order to be in alignment with a “Spiritual God.” Another doctrine is formulated that says that if one does not say some prescribed prayer in some prescribed way that God will not find that one in “His” favor - and on and on, it goes.
But in all probability, the basis of all this assumed “doctrine” is wrong. In all probability, God is not really separated from anything. Why? Because in all probability, God is really not a “Person” outside of anything, but, in truth, a “Reality in All” because God is probably equal to Infinity - and Infinity is present in All. Thus, no one needs to do anything to be “unified” with God. Why would anything - or anyone - need to be unified with God if God is already IN all? All that is required by various doctrines formulated by dissatisfied souls, then, is “probably” for naught.
All of this living life based on someone else’s idea of what one must do to find favor with God is just one of the many “false standards” of mankind. It is false because it is not true. No one is really separated from God; and all who are led to believe there is a separation are basing their lives on false standards - or a false standard.
Would a Shiite Moslem be so quick to assassinate a fellow Moslem, a Sunni Moslem, if that Shiite was aware that God is not really separated from Life? Why does the Shiite act to kill a brother if that brother is one of the saved? Why? Because one Moslem is convinced that another Moslem is really a heretic - and thus not really a “true Moslem” at all. Thus, one Moslem is convinced that “his God” will smile down upon him if he “justly” removes all heretics - within the faith and outside of it.
But that standard is based on a false idea in the first place - that God is outside of us to be able to favor one of us over another. Why is it that one Moslem believes another is a heretic? Because one Moslem has been convinced by interpretation of a given “doctrine” that another Moslem is out of order.
From the Moslems to the Jews! At least ancient Jews believed that God can favor their race over another - and that was the entire scope of their religion. Thus, Jews of old believed that they needed to pray to their God in order to find favor with that God. If they did not pray to their God, then even as Jews, they would have been “heretical” and thus deserved to be eliminated from salvation.
In truth, ancient Christianity was no different. It taught that only those who find favor with God can be saved. What is that but an expression of a belief that some can be “outside of God”? But the notion is “probably” false. God is not really outside of anything or anyone; and thus no one needs “saved” from a Godlessness that cannot really exist.
Sadly, though, masses of Christians and masses of Jews and masses of Moslems have chosen to institute doctrines based on a falsehood - that God can favor one over another; and once more, those same doctrines have designated this life as “no good” in comparison to some fantasy existence someplace else. Thus, to find the “good” life someplace else, we must deny the “bad” life that is here and now.
But what are the consequences of believing that this life is bad? Some of us must act bad in order to “prove” that this is really a bad life. From that, we have people acting badly. It goes with the territory of believing that this life is really “bad.” We must require a certain amount of bad or else our doctrine that this life is really bad would be suspect.
And if all were really good, then we would have to redefine good to include some bad in it. That is what false standards do. They look to justify themselves; and if need be, some who are really good must be turned bad in order to justify the doctrine of this being a “bad” world.
One of the “bad” acts, then, within a really “good” world is the act of going natural. If going natural were allowed, it would put to pity the doctrine that life is really bad because practice would prove that we are not the monsters without clothes that many insist we are. But we must not be allowed to pity a doctrine that practice would prove is wrong. Thus, going natural is banned - for the sake of the good of the world.
False Standard # 2 -
Everyone is Sinful
I must admit that as a child, I did believe that. I believed that “everyone is sinful” and that “all fall short of the glory of God” because that is what I was taught. Somehow, it made sense to me when I was a child that God could be outside of me. It was that “outside of me” that allowed for me to believe that I “could be sinful.”
But those days of that belief have not lasted. I no longer believe I “can be sinful” - related to my relationship with God - because I no longer believe that God “can be outside of me.” I guess you could say that I believe in a different God than the God of my youth.
When I was a kid, I saw my little world as just that - little. I saw the Earth as being the “bottom of the world.” There was nothing below me but ground. So, within that scope of things, I could imagine a God somehow standing - or flying - above all of that. I was down below. I could imagine a God being above. In fact, I was taught that the Heaven I wanted to reach was up above. God was like a “Super Being” that stood above the Earth and was like someone who would either scowl at those who did not believe in “Him” and sentence them to Hell (always “below”) - or as I hoped for myself - like someone who would be there to hand out congratulations and welcomes to that wonderful place called Heaven (always “above”). Nice thoughts - but based on false ideas.
Now I know that it is not likely that the Earth is anything but a spec floating about within an Infinite, Endless Universe of Existence; and I am a spec on a spec. Now I know that the Earth is indeed ground below me, but I know now that there is nothing but sky below the ending of the “bottom of the Earth.” In a very real way, there is no such thing as a “bottom of the Earth” because the Earth is a round ball in space. There is no “below the Earth” anymore than there is an “above the Earth.” Thus, there can be no “Hell below” as there can be no “Heaven above.” How can there be the proverbial Heaven and Hell if their original definitions are false? Tell me that!
Can God be a “Super Being” that can be imagined to be watching over things, waiting to judge all beings for being good or bad? Well, that is what could be called an “infantile” impression of God. How can God even be a “Being” that is separated from me or anything at all if God has to equal that vast Endless Existence I now know probably exists. How can God be an “Individual” at all if there is no place where God can’t be? An individual has to have limits, but God can have no limits being equal to Infinity.
When I was a kid, I did not think much about anything - and I guess that is why my folks and my faith - Catholicism - could lead me to believe things that can’t be true. I believed that there is a God outside of me because that is what I was taught - and I am absolutely positive that those folks who taught me that believed it themselves. They really believed that God can exist outside of things, thereby putting God in a position where “He” could judge us for doing good or bad.
But let’s be real here! What do you think? Can there be a “Being God” if there can be no real end of existence itself? How could it be? If God is the “Supreme Being” that most folks still believe “He” is, how could it be that a “Supreme Being” could even exist outside of all existence? An Infinite God would have to be separate from all existence if God could be a person. Right? But how can God be separate from all existence if Existence is Endless? How can God be a person that can only thrive “up above” when there really can be no “down below”? Tell me that! Where is this “up above” if there can be no “up” - related to things in space? Where is this “down below” if there can be no “down” - related to things in space? Again, tell me that!
Some folks tell me that I get too heavy thinking such things, but I do not believe it is “heavy thinking” at all to ponder the probable reality of our world. It is not heavy thinking at all. It’s only thinking; and I guess that is something I did not do much of when I was a kid - and many (if not, most) don’t do much of as adults. We just do not think. I have become convinced of that. And that is why we can be taken by a halter and led this way or that way when it comes to somebody else’s perception of God - and right and wrong - and sin.
So, what does it mean that “everyone is sinful” and that “everyone falls short of the glory of God” if, in fact, no one can fall short of God because God has to be everywhere and in everything? How can I be “short of the glory of God” if I cannot even be “short of God”?
The tragedy of false belief, however, is that people act like what they think is true is actually true. They really believe they can be “short of God” and thus they act like it too. If God is “good,” then it stands to reason that if everyone falls short of God, then all must be “bad.” If I can be bad, then presto, I am given license to act like a fool and to act like the person I really am. What does it matter if I go out and grab some child and rape her? I am only doing what is “expected of a bad person.” Right?
Does it matter at all that it cannot be so? Does it matter at all that I cannot be sinful - as in lacking God - because I cannot lack God? Does it matter at all that God can’t be a person waiting to rescue me from a “bad life” when, in reality, there can be no such thing as a “bad life” - related to God? Does it matter that because God must be IN all existence and must be equal to All Existence that it is impossible for me to “sin against God”? How can I sin against something that is in me?
Why not accept the “probable truth” that no one can sin against God and nothing can be short of the glory of God? Why not throw all that other nonsense out like a bunch of trash that is no longer of use? Why not take off your clothes and realize that you are “taking off” what man has put on you, not what God has put on you? Why not stand up and tell yourself that you have a new life because of a new vision? Why not realize that all existence is Good because a Good God must be IN all - and that includes you?
For what it’s worth, I did so long, long ago; and that is just one example that it can be done.
- To Be Continued -