Reader Heather sent this one in, I haven’t had the time to write about it until now (sad, really). But here it is, quite the interesting read on the God debate, by Salon’s Steve Paulson. It’s a rather long interview with an ex-nun turned author, but if you have the time it’s worth it. A little sample:

Religion is a search for transcendence. But transcendence isn’t necessarily sited in an external god, which can be a very unspiritual, unreligious concept. The sages were all extremely concerned with transcendence, with going beyond the self and discovering a realm, a reality, that could not be defined in words. Buddhists talk about nirvana in very much the same terms as monotheists describe God.

…

Jesus did not spend a great deal of time discoursing about the trinity or original sin or the incarnation, which have preoccupied later Christians. He went around doing good and being compassionate. In the Quran, metaphysical speculation is regarded as self-indulgent guesswork. And it makes people, the Quran says, quarrelsome and stupidly sectarian. You can’t prove these things one way or the other, so why quarrel about it? The Taoists said this kind of speculation where people pompously hold forth about their opinions was egotism. And when you’re faced with the ineffable and the indescribable, they would say it’s belittling to cut it down to size. Sometimes, I think the way monotheists talk about God is unreligious.

Armstrong and I don’t agree on religion and the nature of God, but I do like her take on it and think that more of those who do believe in whatever holy book they do would be well served to listen to this woman. Cast away the dogmatic systems, the rituals and the unnecessary symbols, pay attention to the lessons, the messages themselves. Lot of religious folk forget that part.