What’s up with worship?

Yesterday my wife had a epiphany. Laurel was driving by a church and saw a sign about Sunday Worship. “Suddenly,” she told me, “the whole idea of worshipping God seemed so ridiculous. How do we know that God wants to be worshipped?”

Excellent question. Which presupposes that there is a God at all. So the notion of “worship” is doubly dubious. The good Christians who attend that church believe in a God for whom there is no demonstrable evidence, and they also believe that this God whom they are clueless about loves to be worshipped.

Why? Because the Bible tells them so. And why should they believe the Bible? Because the Bible tells them to. It’s no wonder most scientists eschew religion. Circular reasoning that leads nowhere isn’t their cup of tea.

Nor, mine.

Christianity believes in a personal God who is the absolutely greatest being there could possibly be. This is Anselm’s Ontological Argument. It doesn’t make any sense to me, but regardless, I’ll agree that if God exists, you’d expect that this dude (or dudette) would put pretenders to perfect divinity to shame.

So I picture really good people like the Dalai Lama, Mother Teresa, or Gandhi being asked, “Is it OK if we worship you?” I’m pretty sure these humble souls would be aghast at the idea. “No, for god’s sake, don’t worship me. Love me, get to know me, be with me—but don’t put me up on a pedestal.”

Yet God does want to be worshipped?

My own adaptation of Anselm’s argument is that if it is possible for you to envision a human being who has higher moral qualities than your conception of God, you’d better rethink that conception.

In his book “Breaking the Spell,” Daniel Dennett addresses the marketability of the two main God hypotheses: God as essence (ground of being, non-anthropomorphic, not in time and space, abstract) or God as conscious supernatural being (who listens to and answers prayers in real time, for instance.) Dennett quotes Rodney Stark:

“There is no more profound religious difference than between faiths involving divine beings and those limited to divine essences,” he [Stark] says, and the latter he judges to be hopeless, because “only divine beings do anything.” Supernatural conscious beings are much better sellers because “the supernatural is the only plausible source of many benefits we greatly desire.”

Ah, now we’ve gotten to the root of worship. It’s an exchange relationship. God asks for praise and devotion; I offer it; God then gives me what I want. Eternal life. A place in heaven. Escape from damnation. Freedom from my sins. Divine wisdom.

Well, I’m with Laurel. The more you ponder the worship game, the more absurd it seems. I’m supposed to kiss God’s ass even though I’ve never seen God. Or his ass. And I don’t even know if this God whom I don’t know likes to have his ass kissed.

For all I know, which I don’t, maybe God hates all this worship stuff and he’s going to kick my ass if I kiss his.

Good luck, faithful worshippers. You might be needing it.

Comments

[Edward]

Can the same be said of meditation, alms giving, Christmas presents? We just want something in return, afterall. Of course it seems ridiculous, but so does a game of catch, stripped of its context.

I haven't felt compelled to worship, so I probably don't know what the deal is, but historians, (are they scientists?) tell us that people have worshipped things long before historical religion. Sympathetic magic is probably the proto-cultus of all these absurd activities.

Seems petty to think that people are tricked into ritual devotion, when it is possible that they are psychologically moved to it, like spiritual OCD.

[Roger]

I wonder when it is proper to worship something? Does this something have to be real and knowable to be worthy of worship?
Take my silly example: the Pic of the Belly Dancer. I think we all can agree, the gal in the black outfit, with sword is a total "babe". Does this mean we should worship her? Think not. Maybe the word "worship" needs to be tossed out. Food for thought.

[Matthew Cromer]

Worship is a story told by Awareness to itself.

Instead of seeing separate "people" everywhere, look at the "stories" that appear everywhere. Then the meaning of worship becomes clear. In reality there are no "people" worshipping other holier "people". It is just the dance of consciousness describing itself to itself. Every seemingly separate person is a dream of separation experienced by the One. The "optical delusion of consciousness" called individuality is actually an object within undivided Awareness, not a subject.

[Steve]

Brian,

Even as a person of faith, I've wondered right along with Laurel what good worship does. It certainly can't make God any greater. I seriously doubt God would 'need' any type of authentication or support from me.

So here's the best I've come up with: worship is drawing a line in the sand. I'm the one who benefits, not God. It allows me to share in the reality revealed, to acknowledge the distinction that I am not God.

But it is also an act: worship is hurling sacred truth right back at the Deity. Not only do I acknowledge the bits of revealed truth but also participate in it.

Hymns and songs of praise bring to mind the awesome nature of God and recount the times of intervention or blessing. As opposed to the 'happy-clappy' type of worship that is often superficially - and only briefly - beneficial, sincere, focused worship is an encounter with the divine. When you're in agreement with God, you're automatically in the divine presence. And that's something not easily forgotten, but too fleeting nonetheless.

My hope is that the experience lasts long enough for me to make it out of the church parking lot before losing patience with some bozo driver cutting in front of me trying to get to lunch before I do.

[Roger]

Steve;
I enjoyed your discussion on Worship. Worship feeds the Emotional aspect of Faith.
Or, emotions feed on the Worship aspect of Faith. I find nothing wrong with what you stated. As stated by others, in other comments: Everyone has their own Mindset.

[Arlo R. Hansen]

Roger, what a tasty tidbit your response is. Here is mine:

WORSHIP, WHO NEEDS IT?
by Arlo R. Hansen

Certainly not God, for what good could worship possibly do for an Infinite Entity who is Omni everything? Make It feel more inclined to grant requests? Hardly, because any act of a finite life form, be it veneration or irreverence, directed toward the Omni-Everything One, would actually be an act of the Omni-Everything One Itself, since by definition, an Infinite Entity encompasses All. How could it, then, make Itself more ultimate than it already is?

Yet, worship services are held daily in thousands of churches, synagogues, temples, shrines, and monasteries. Since the Omni-Everything One cannot benefit from worship, it leaves only the worshipers who may gain from it. What each gains may be as varied as the number engaged in the activity. For some, whatever they gain must not last long, because they repeat the ritual on a regular basis.

Seekers of understanding of the mystery of life generally agree that the appearance of separation is illusion. In actuality, All is One. One is All. Taken to its final conclusion, I Am all that is. And that applies to each of us. To accept this, I must conclude that all the “others” out “there,” are actually me. Likewise, each of you “others” must come to the same conclusion.

At this point, the thought leaps into my mind (as it must in yours since you are me) “how come I am only aware of operating as this single entity with the name of Arlo R. Hansen? If I am everybody and everything, how did my awareness get limited to just little ‘ole me?”

Now, while we may intellectually know that we need not strive to become something other than what we are, but only need to remember what we are, we do not feel or experience what we are, i.e., being everything. Some claim to have reached that state through meditation, or other means. If they have, then the possibility exists for me to do likewise; but just because the possibility exists does not mean that I will do so.

I personally know of only one person who related what that experience is like. She called it “puddling,” suggesting it was like liquidizing and flowing into her surroundings. If you, dear reader, have also experienced being the One, you can testify as to the aptness of her description.

However, having once attained the state, she did not remain in it until her departure from this plane. Neither do I know if she could enter this state whenever she pleased just by willing herself there, or what. It seems to me that if getting to this experience is the goal, once attained, the attainee would not want to return to his finite state of limited awareness.

Still, being “All” may be boring after the novelty wears off (if it does). For all I know, it may not. But if it does, that may be the reason Omni-Everything decided to forget what it IS. (Could it do that?)

Much has been said about our higher self and getting in touch with it. I have followed the logical thought of some writings and been amazed at the clarity used in arriving at the "One" concept, only to be dismayed when the author brought up the higher self, listening for that “still, small, voice” (how can it be “still” and still say something, [or doesn't “still” mean quiet?] and how come it is always small?).

Using affirmations, giving thanks, prayer, and all the rest of "worship" trappings, signifies to me the disappearance of Oneness and the return of separateness. The Omni-Everything needs none of this because it is ALL OF THIS. It needs no-thing (no one thing) because it is Every-thing (All things).

Ironically, it has taken me nine paragraphs to say to you that since All is Complete, there was nothing I needed to say!

[Matthew Cromer]

I liked that, Arlo.

[Arlo R. Hansen]

Actually, Matthew, it was your astute comment I was refering to. The author's names appearing under the dotted line, confused me; but then no matter the human names displayed, all done by Awareness.

[Stephen Cowart]

If God needs his ass kissed that would make god prideful and therefore that would make god evil. God does not want that. He wants our fellowship, as I believe all people want. Trump and most politicians need there ass kissed, God does not need this nor want this. Plus I think it is easy to control people if you are giving them this emotional high in church. They truly believe they are experiencing god.