Episode 9
Conduits of Light, Choosing Love Over Fear
Tracking Wisdom
Episode 9
Conduits of Light, Choosing Love Over Fear
Recorded - 10/03/22
DESCRIPTION
The latest installment of the Tracking Wisdom Podcast presents a compelling discourse on Neale Donald Walsch's *Conversations with God*, a text that has garnered significant attention since its publication. Hosts Ryan and Peter embark on a critical examination of the book, articulating their initial hesitations regarding its narrative style, which they find somewhat contrived. However, as they engage with its substantive content, they uncover profound insights that resonate deeply with their personal and philosophical beliefs about spirituality and divinity.
The conversation delves into the complexities of Walsch's assertions, juxtaposing them with the commercial aspects that have emerged alongside the book's success. Both hosts grapple with the implications of engaging with a text that has become a cornerstone of contemporary spiritual discourse while simultaneously recognizing the potential pitfalls associated with its commodification. They explore the themes of authenticity and the skepticism that often accompanies discussions of spiritual literature, particularly in light of the book's popularity and its implications for those who may approach its teachings without prior exposure to spiritual or philosophical frameworks.
Moreover, Ryan and Peter engage in a rich exploration of the parallels between *Conversations with God* and various religious traditions, particularly Buddhism. They highlight the universal truths that permeate Walsch's work, suggesting that the messages contained within resonate with core teachings found across diverse spiritual landscapes. This analysis prompts a broader inquiry into the nature of truth in spiritual literature, encouraging listeners to reflect on their own beliefs and the ways in which they interpret and integrate these teachings into their lives. The podcast episode serves as an invitation to engage with the complexities of spiritual exploration and the importance of discernment when encountering profound ideas.
Takeaways:
- The podcast emphasizes that foreign views and interpretations should not be perceived as official advice or organizational positions.
- Listeners are reminded that the content presented is intended solely for informational and entertainment purposes.
- The discussion revolves around the profound impact of the book 'Conversations with God' and its resonance with listeners.
- We delve into the complex feelings surrounding the book, particularly its portrayal of spirituality and the potential for exploitation.
- The speakers express skepticism regarding the book's commercial success and its implications for spiritual authenticity.
- We conclude that while exploring spiritual content, one must remain critical and discerning of the sources and messages presented.
Episode Resources
- Clip from show "Community": Season 1 Episode 9 Debate - Annie and Jeff win the debate against City college! As Jeff is drafted to help lead Greendale's debate team against the all-powerful City College, the team must provide winning evidence that humankind is evil at their core while their competitors must prove humans are truly good.
- Conversations With God: An Uncommon Dialogue by: Neale Donald Walsch
If this content has been meaningful or entertaining for you,
consider showing your support to help make this content possible.
Review us on Podchaser
We are grateful for your gifts.
Have a discussion topic idea or show feedback? Use the Suggestion Box link below!
Social Media:
License: Unless otherwise noted, all excerpts of copyright material not owned by ETH Studio are used under the Fair Use doctrine for the purposes of commentary, scholarship, research and teaching. Works are substantially transformed by means of personal insight and commentary as well as highlighting important corollaries to additional thoughts, theories and works to demonstrate alignments and consistencies.
Copyright 2025 Ears That Hear Media Corporation
Keywords: Conversations with God, spiritual conversations, Ryan and Peter podcast, Tracking Wisdom Podcast, self-help book discussions, philosophical ideas, modern spirituality, skepticism and faith, personal development, inherent goodness of man, Buddhist perspectives, channeling God, emotional well-being, mindfulness practices, overcoming skepticism, spiritual but not religious, book review podcast, exploring divine consciousness, ego and spirituality, practical spirituality tips
Transcript
Foreign views, interpretations and opinions expressed are not advice nor official positions presented on behalf of any organization or institution.
Speaker A:They are for informational and entertainment purposes only.
Speaker A:Now join Ryan and Peter for another episode of the Tracking Wisdom Podcast.
Speaker B:You started reading the book Conversations with God.
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker B:About halfway through, it had some resonance, which, to be honest, I'm a little surprised about.
Speaker B:I'm glad.
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:So the first couple pages, like, where he's just telling the story kind of, you know, I was like, it's kind of hokey, you know, but as soon as he got into content and kind of this, the statements, I was, I was hooked.
Speaker A:I was like, oh, yeah, this is, this is really good stuff.
Speaker B:Nice.
Speaker A:Now I have kind of this complicated feeling about it as, as a book, you know, or as a, as a company.
Speaker A:Sure.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Because now it's a whole, it's a whole industry.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker A:Kind of thing.
Speaker A:And so, I mean, I think the content is valuable.
Speaker A:There's a question of how much value do you put on the medium of the message?
Speaker A:Right, right.
Speaker A:It's like, oh, is this, what is it, what it purports to be?
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:Like what it purports to be isn't really relevant to the content.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:And the content is just ideas that you either, you know, think, well, these sound like really good ideas or not.
Speaker A:Kind of like the Bible.
Speaker A:Plenty of people read the Bible and don't say, plenty of people value the Bible and don't say, this is the word of God put onto paper.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:You don't have to have that literal belief in order to get value out of the content.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker A:And that's why I feel about this.
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:The alignment is, you know, you find the alignment surprising.
Speaker A:It's actually trivial because so much of it is recognizable as parallel to Buddhism.
Speaker B:Sure.
Speaker A:You know, or if you were skeptical, you would say derived from Buddhism.
Speaker A:And this is, this is part of the kind of complicated feelings.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:And of course I read the Wikipedia article which is, you know, who knows what, you know, how helpful that is.
Speaker A:But it kind of kind of goes down through, you know, all of the parallels in other writings, whether they're religious or philosophical, non religious writings, which, you know, the comment is, well, he, he references the, all these things that come up in other places and he doesn't, he doesn't acknowledge them or reference them.
Speaker A:It's like, well, I'm not sure that's really relevant because he's not saying these are my ideas.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:That's the thing.
Speaker A:So, you know, I mean, if you, if you, like, you could view the whole thing as kind of a dramatization, a fictional way of presenting philosophical ideas.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker A:Which has been done elsewhere, you know, for other.
Speaker A:For other things as well.
Speaker B:So, I mean, even the power of myth, like that was kind of the core idea behind that, is putting story and narrative behind the idea and the behaviors.
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:But.
Speaker A:But as a book, of course, it's fully attributed.
Speaker A:I mean, it's written by a scholar who is.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:You know.
Speaker A:Yeah, that's so.
Speaker A:So by and large, I found it made me feel very good.
Speaker A:And, you know, if you.
Speaker A:If you subscribe to the notion that something that resonates with your heart is true, then I think it's great.
Speaker A:Then there's the Western skeptical part, which says, you know, which is actually addressed in there.
Speaker A:It's like you don't believe things that make you feel good, you know, and that's true.
Speaker A:And that's true in my own path, my own studies, that, you know, people reject what makes them feel good.
Speaker A:They're suspicious of it.
Speaker A:We're trained to be suspicious of things that make you feel good because people deceive you by telling you things that make you feel good.
Speaker A:So telling you what you want to hear.
Speaker A:So, you know, that's a big question in experiencing a book like this is, oh, is he just telling me what I want to hear?
Speaker B:Sure.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:So I'm a little.
Speaker A:I have very complicated feelings about it, so I'm, like, a little skeptical about it.
Speaker A:I'm a little concerned about, like, who takes this on.
Speaker B:Sure.
Speaker A:You know, if someone has, like, no background and they just come to this as, say, their first religious or spiritual reading, and I'm sure it happens.
Speaker A:And I'm a little.
Speaker A:I'm a little concerned because it does definitely have a.
Speaker A:I don't.
Speaker A:I don't want to say cultish feel.
Speaker A:Cultish.
Speaker A:Only in the sense that there's this individual who's putting it forth, and then, you know, which.
Speaker A:And he addresses this.
Speaker A:But the fact is he made money, and then he did more, and he made more money, and he's like, you know, so it.
Speaker A:It's basically this dichotomy of being a spiritual idealist versus being a pragmatic skeptic.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:And they're pretty much indirect opposition on this kind of thing.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:So it's hard.
Speaker A:It's just this.
Speaker A:So it makes this just very complicated response.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:So I've got definitely.
Speaker A:Definitely have.
Speaker A:You know, it's almost like an angel devil like that or.
Speaker A:Or Spock and McCoy, whatever.
Speaker A:You know, there's like these opposite voices.
Speaker A:One saying, oh, this is, you know, this is truly wonderful.
Speaker A:The other is like, oh, this is very illogical.
Speaker A:You know, it's like, anyway, all right, enough for me.
Speaker B:That's interesting.
Speaker B:I, I agree with you.
Speaker B:I mean, obviously there's any time you have anyone putting out the.
Speaker B:Essentially.
Speaker B:So I guess as an intro to the audience that the book Conversations with God, it did become a three part book.
Speaker B:But we're currently.
Speaker B:You're reading the first book.
Speaker B:The information in the first book seemed to resonate with me more cleanly than the subsequent two books.
Speaker B:And basically it's a story or a testimony of just kind of a regular guy, American, you know, middle aged man.
Speaker B: s written back in the, in the: Speaker B:And he was kind of facing a number of challenges in his life.
Speaker B:He was losing his job and it sounded like he had a marriage or two that were falling apart.
Speaker B:And so he was feeling kind of at a low point in his life.
Speaker B:And he had been brought up in Catholicism, I think, or some Christian faith, but wasn't really practicing at all or anything.
Speaker B:So this is intended to be presented, I guess, similar to what we're doing in that it wasn't an academic type of presentation or even, you know, insinuating that there was academic and scholarly information in here, but basically was him.
Speaker B:He was at his wit's end and he was kind of calling out to God and something just called him to grab a piece of paper and a pen and just start writing down questions and found he was being inspired with the answers.
Speaker A:So we should say, which I thought was interesting, that he had a long history of writing out his conflicts.
Speaker A:So whenever he was angry at someone, he would write to them without intending and sharing it.
Speaker A:But he would, he would resolve, he would do his internal work by writing it out on legal pads.
Speaker A:And so this was completely consistent with that.
Speaker A:And he said, instead of writing to the people I was upset at, I decided to write to the ultimate, you know, person who was responsible for, for this.
Speaker A:And, and so that, and that made the difference because for the first time he got a response in his head.
Speaker A:He stopped writing in his hand, stayed there.
Speaker A:And then something came to him and he wrote it, which was the quote, response from God.
Speaker B:I mean, so, yeah, I mean, so essentially it's a book that I guess, for lack of better terms, is basically him channeling the thoughts and responses that he was getting from God.
Speaker B:But God as kind of similar to what we've been describing, what we think God is, you know, the kind of central consciousness, ultimate reality kind of thing.
Speaker B:So, yeah, so I am obviously aware of some of those complicated feelings.
Speaker B:And while I feel like I'm.
Speaker B:I guess I'm in the school of what resonates with me, I feel like has truth and what doesn't, I just reject.
Speaker B:And those two things could come from the same person.
Speaker B:You know, there's things that I'm just like, that's right, right.
Speaker B:And then there's things that resonate with me.
Speaker B:And even in the book, to your point, and I don't know if you've gotten here, but basically he was like.
Speaker B:He even said, you know, what if this is all just coming from my head?
Speaker B:And the answer is basically, what's the difference?
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:That was early on.
Speaker B:You're already tied into this consciousness.
Speaker B:You're just kind of like opening your awareness to be able to remember it.
Speaker A:I mean, if.
Speaker A:If we believe in the inherent divinity of man, which is something that's come up repeatedly, and I think we agree on that, that everyone, everyone is connected to divinity directly, then.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:There's no reason that this shouldn't happen.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:I will say that I thought you did because you talked about.
Speaker A:I think in our first episode, you introduced Conversations of God as your.
Speaker A:As your basic kind of thought structure and you did a great job.
Speaker A:It's like, oh, yeah, this is, this is exactly what you know.
Speaker A:Right?
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:In fact.
Speaker A:Well, anyway, I think.
Speaker A:I think in.
Speaker A:In many ways better than I may have done with Buddhism.
Speaker B:Oh, I think you just have a little self consciousness about it.
Speaker B:I do, I certainly do.
Speaker A:Which was another topic I was.
Speaker A:That was the other thing we were going to talk about today.
Speaker B:Yeah, Well, I mean, I think that that's.
Speaker B:I have found value in.
Speaker B:In hearing your understanding of Buddhism.
Speaker B:You know, although there was one.
Speaker B:I.
Speaker B:That is interesting.
Speaker B:I have some comments about that lead to that last thing, but the point I was, I guess, gonna make is it sounds crazy.
Speaker B:So I'm hesitant and skeptical.
Speaker B:I do not.
Speaker B:While the book resonated strongly with me, I am hesitant to freely market for it.
Speaker A:Right, right, exactly.
Speaker B:And though I thought it was interesting, your comment about who might potentially come across this information.
Speaker B:And while I agree with the sentiment, I don't find much difference than them coming across the Book of Mormon or the Bible or anything.
Speaker B:I mean, that's kind of what all of these are purporting to be.
Speaker B:You know, there's just a stronger institution behind some of the other ones, but they've all made money.
Speaker A:I mean, that's, that's the thing is that the only reason.
Speaker A:And then this is this.
Speaker A:I'm not presenting this as a rational argument.
Speaker A:It's just a thought process, which is.
Speaker A:It's more suspect because it's tied to an individual, and.
Speaker A:And therefore, it's an individual who profits from any expansion of it.
Speaker A:So that's the.
Speaker A:And not to.
Speaker A:Not to say that.
Speaker A:Actually, it's kind of interesting maybe to compare it to Dianetics, because this is much, much better written than Dianetics.
Speaker A:Like, I could not get through two chapters of Dianetics just because of the bad, bad, bad writing.
Speaker B:What is that?
Speaker B:I don't know.
Speaker A:Dianetics.
Speaker A:Oh, Scientology.
Speaker A:Oh, L.
Speaker A:Ron Hubbard.
Speaker A:Okay.
Speaker A:Which is weird because.
Speaker A:Because L.
Speaker A:Ron Hubbard was a writer by profession, and so it's like, how could he.
Speaker A:Anyway, that's a whole nother thing.
Speaker A:So, I mean, apparently he just churned this thing out.
Speaker A:Whereas Conversations with God, it's not.
Speaker A:Well, first of all, it's not as grandiose as Dianetics.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:And it's quite.
Speaker A:It's quite entertaining.
Speaker A:I mean, I would.
Speaker A:I would recommend it as a fictional read.
Speaker A:You know, don't, you know, just say, oh, this is a, you know, book that someone created about what if this happened?
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:You know, and just say, oh, it's a dramatization.
Speaker A:And read it and you'll enjoy it from it.
Speaker A:Yeah, well, I mean, it's entertaining, for one thing.
Speaker A:So the voice of God in here is, as he repeatedly says, is pretty flip.
Speaker A:And, yeah, so it's.
Speaker A:It's an entertaining read with a lot of kind of good, heartfelt ideas in it.
Speaker A:If you don't want to get into the.
Speaker A:Is he channeling?
Speaker A:Is he a modern mystic?
Speaker A:Is he a modern prophet, you know, of God and whatnot?
Speaker A:And to be fair, he addresses that right away.
Speaker A:He seems to.
Speaker A:Now, if we stop, if we go back and say, okay, this is totally nonfiction.
Speaker A:This is his literal experience.
Speaker A:He kind of interacts with this voice that's coming to him, and he's very skeptical.
Speaker A:He's like, wait a second, this seems crazy.
Speaker A:And, you know, the voice is like, why is it crazy?
Speaker A:And so he throws up all these arguments about why he's not comfortable with it.
Speaker A:And.
Speaker A:And the voice of God on paper just says, yeah, don't worry about it.
Speaker A:So I did read on a website.
Speaker A:Oh, so apparently there's a movie.
Speaker A:Oh, yeah, you gotta look.
Speaker A:You gotta look.
Speaker A:You do some Googling on this.
Speaker A:On this.
Speaker A:Because there are many, many books now, more than just four.
Speaker A:Yeah, there.
Speaker B:I see that.
Speaker B:When I was looking for that One.
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:There are at least eight.
Speaker B:Okay.
Speaker A:Of, you know, in strictly conversations with God.
Speaker A:And then it's, like, really built out from there.
Speaker A:And I think he's got more than one website.
Speaker B:Okay.
Speaker A:He's got.
Speaker A:So it really seems to have been.
Speaker A:I didn't follow links or anything, but it seems like he's.
Speaker A:It's built into quite a industry, and it's.
Speaker A:You know, it's translated into 37 languages or something.
Speaker B:Yeah, I didn't know that.
Speaker A:And apparently he's traveled all over the world, so one of the details I read was that this might have been an interview.
Speaker A:I think he said in an interview that when he wrote the questions on the legal pad to begin with, he then heard a voice over his shoulder, and he turned to look to see who was there, and there was no one there.
Speaker A:And then he sat, and in the book, he says his hand was frozen as if held by an unseen force.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:And then he had ideas come into his head, and he put them down on the paper, and that's the way it was working.
Speaker A:So he doesn't describe it as if his hand is being operated.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:But he did.
Speaker A:He did make the statement held as by an.
Speaker A:As if by an unseen force, which I thought was kind of definitely leaned towards that.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:And then he kind of abandoned that.
Speaker A:And from then on, I mean, I.
Speaker A:I think we should probably come back to this in more detail.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker B:We can.
Speaker B:I think.
Speaker B:I mean, I don't know that we.
Speaker B:We can discuss how it would be formatted, you know, like, what kind of format we would do, whether it would be, like, going through the whole book or if there was.
Speaker B:Like I've mentioned before, in fact, we talked about a little bit where it gets to the Ten Commitments versus the Ten Commandments.
Speaker B:And that, like, that idea resonated specifically with me.
Speaker B:And so I don't know if maybe we want to pick some key ideas out of it that really resonate with us, that we want to converse about versus going through, like, not a page.
Speaker A:By page, you know, like, no, I did not want.
Speaker A:I did not want to go through it the way we did Power of Myth.
Speaker A:I wanted to pick out highlights that we wanted to talk about, and especially the thing that I had resistance to.
Speaker A:I'm really curious.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker A:Because I'm really receptive to most of the ideas, and then some of the stuff I just find confusing.
Speaker B:Sure.
Speaker A:So, I mean, I think the book's version of Trinity is very interesting, and I think we should probably have an extended conversation about that.
Speaker A:You know, Having a lot of Buddhist background, I come to a lot of the content and say, oh, that's.
Speaker A:I don't say it comes from Buddhism, but I say it's very consistent with Buddhism.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker A:You know, it's like, well, or.
Speaker A:Or even that's.
Speaker A:Oh, that's a Buddhist idea.
Speaker A:Like, that's a Buddhist concept, too.
Speaker A:Not saying that he stole it from.
Speaker A:And which is unsurprising given our central thesis that all religions contain elements, core elements that serve.
Speaker A:That serve us, and that they're just.
Speaker A:They have different accretions around them and they're presented in different ways and, you know, but there's certain core things that are shared.
Speaker A:And so I think you're going to see that here as well.
Speaker A:Some.
Speaker B:Yeah, well, I.
Speaker B:I guess I'm glad to hear you say that because that was kind of my feeling when we started talking and you started sharing these Buddhist ideas and.
Speaker B:And this was kind of my center of worldview.
Speaker B:But not because of the book, but because the ideas that the book presents are consistent with kind of how I think it is.
Speaker B:And then when you started talking about the Buddhist stuff, which I had virtually no background previously on.
Speaker B:I was seeing so many alignments and similarities between those concepts that.
Speaker B:And I think in the book, not only did I find the consistency in Buddhism, but I seem to draw the consistency even with Christianity and other, you know, religion.
Speaker B:And finding that core kind of element in the.
Speaker B:In the undertone, you know, and seeing.
Speaker B:Okay, I can see how these two teachings may have started in a very similar.
Speaker B:Like, from a similar path, but due to the accretion and everything maybe diverged some.
Speaker B:So.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker B:And I.
Speaker B:I guess I wasn't sure how you would.
Speaker B:If you would be able to overcome the whole conversation with God thing.
Speaker B:And it seems like you're okay to move beyond it and try and.
Speaker A:Yeah, I mean, what you can from it, it doesn't.
Speaker A:It certainly didn't put me off reading the book.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:You know, it was like I said, like the first page or two.
Speaker A:I was like, this is kind of hokey, but as soon as you start getting the ideas, the ideas grabbed me and I was like, oh, well, this is interesting.
Speaker A:What else does he say?
Speaker A:Know.
Speaker A:So, yeah, I'm looking forward.
Speaker A:I'm looking forward to finishing it.
Speaker A:Yeah, I think we should come back and definitely some core concepts that would be good conversation, extended conversation, and then whatever we see as, like, gems that stood out to us being meaningful or significant.
Speaker A:So there's something I read yesterday that just keeps on coming, popping up in my Head as we're talking about this.
Speaker A:And I really can't see the.
Speaker A:I think there might have been a connection early on, but I don't know what it is anymore.
Speaker A:But apparently the Dalai Lama.
Speaker A:This was attributed to the Dalai Lama that he believes that the inherent state of man is kindness.
Speaker A:And he says, and this has nothing to do with Buddha, Dharma.
Speaker A:Like, if he was not a Buddhist but was studying what he knows, he would come to this conclusion.
Speaker A:And it's pretty simple.
Speaker A:Which is basically how what he calls affection, you know, altruism, relationships, connection, kindness are physiologically good for humans.
Speaker A:And the absence of those things is deadly.
Speaker A:You know, I mean, at a.
Speaker A:At an early age, right.
Speaker A:You can kill a child by taking care of it physically and not providing any emotional support.
Speaker A:And so that's.
Speaker A:I.
Speaker A:I just thought that was a very stark and interesting observation because it goes against our critical voices, our cynical voices, our skeptical voices.
Speaker A:So.
Speaker A:And I think that's why I was talking about it, because I was saying I have this cynical, skeptical thing, saying, well, you know, it's just a manipulation that.
Speaker A:The fact is that living from a position of suspicion, which really equates to fear, puts you in a state of stress which is physically harmful to you, shortens your life.
Speaker A:Like, it's just obviously a bad thing to do.
Speaker A:And yet a lot of our culture is about that, versus being more open, being more altruistic, being more generous in.
Speaker A:Generous in your spirit, generous in your attitude.
Speaker A:Not in terms of giving things away, but in terms of, you know, can I allow this?
Speaker A:Can I accept this?
Speaker A:So, I mean, obviously, this is the kind of thing that's touched on in here, but I had.
Speaker A:I just saw this attributed to the Dalai Lama yesterday, and I thought it really struck me kind of as in context of this.
Speaker A:I mean, by itself, I think it's very interesting observation.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker A:It's kind of.
Speaker A:It's.
Speaker A:It's kind of proof oh, man is inherently good.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:He must be, because he's evolved, that I'm like, otherwise, we'd all die.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker B:That's a good point.
Speaker A:If people were really.
Speaker A:You know.
Speaker A:And part of his.
Speaker A:He frequently says things like, you know, think about your mother and your mother, everything your mother did for you and how kind and blah, blah, blah.
Speaker A:And again, in our modern society, you think about dysfunctional families and abuse, and you're like, well, but what about people who aren't like that?
Speaker A:And we know that that happens, but.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:The fact is that although that happens and it's a problem and it's A very serious problem for people who experience it.
Speaker A:To think that that's what the world like, that that's what the world is like, is irrational because the species could never have proliferated if that's what people were like.
Speaker A:Or even if, even if, like.
Speaker A:Oh well, now that we're at 8 billion people now, that's what people is like, are like.
Speaker A:Like.
Speaker A:No, because people would be dying a lot more like the.
Speaker A:Anyway, just a, just a thought.
Speaker A:Trying to make the argument that here that we should be positive.
Speaker A:Well, not.
Speaker A:Yes, kind.
Speaker A:Yes.
Speaker A:For, for our own sake and for others sakes, but just we should, we should be optimistic that when we say we should be kind, we're really not going against the grain or swimming upstream.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker A:In terms of humanity, in terms of our culture, maybe.
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:But our culture does not represent, you know, as great as America is, it doesn't represent the world.
Speaker A:And as much as our media is dominant, even media doesn't represent humanity right at the core.
Speaker A:So anyway.
Speaker B:Yeah, no, I mean it.
Speaker A:Blowing some sunshine there, I guess.
Speaker B:No.
Speaker B:So the past.
Speaker B:I told you a couple sessions ago about my August and how phenomenally blissful it was and wanting to get back to that, you know, and I've been really trying to think about what happened or what was going on in August because there was again a number of things that went on that could have contributed and probably did to some degree contribute to the satisfaction or you know, the, the bliss.
Speaker B:And I have happened across I guess some new, I don't know again also in the 90s, which is weird, I don't know what happened in the 90s or if these things are like kind of like piggybacked off each other or what.
Speaker B:And I'm also again kind of taking the open minded perspective to just receive the information and kind of see what sticks with the things that, that resonate.
Speaker B:And I think that when I look at what it purports to be and you know, any associations it may have with like business or whatever, I'm resistant and hesitant and don't like want to share it.
Speaker B:But the information has been like mind blowing.
Speaker B:Not mind blowing as far as like, I've never heard this kind of thing, but mind blowing in its consistency with ideas here, ideas I've heard elsewhere.
Speaker B:And that I guess I mentioned that with the near death experience idea as well is when I start to see those consistencies in abstract places that are unconnected, it starts to make me feel like there's more to this than, than just the.
Speaker B:At face value, you know, so it's the way of mastery.
Speaker B:It was books, but I'm listening to it just on YouTube as narrated and their channelings of Jesus, which, you know, take it or leave it, whatever.
Speaker B:That's not the important piece to me.
Speaker B:And I guess even in the messaging, it's not important in messaging, you know, the, the message is, you know, Jesus as a man is not the important thing.
Speaker B:The Christ mind, the universal mind that is available to all of us is really what it was getting to.
Speaker B:Good.
Speaker B:And again, it, it aligns very strongly with kind of conversations with God and some of the Buddhist stuff we talked about.
Speaker B:So.
Speaker B:But the idea that a key idea behind it has been the egoic mind being what suppresses our, our divine mind or spirit mind and creates the fear.
Speaker B:And that that was all by choice in, in us to experience the separation of God similar to what is talked about in conversations with God.
Speaker B:Again, not the important piece, but the important piece being that in order to achieve the enlightenment and achieve heaven on earth, achieve those blissful states, it is the, the genuine commitment internally and emotionally, not just like trying to trick your mind saying, oh, now I believe this and this is what I'm doing.
Speaker B:You know, that at the core of your being, to forego the connections of value and judgment that we put on events, materials, things about us not being tied to the outcome kind of thing, but really more being part of the process of creation and to be a conduit or a conduit is the word they use then that.
Speaker B:Actually I'll speak to that in a second of kind of the, the divine Spirit, the divine light, which is love, to shine that forth onto the world through your, through everything you do.
Speaker B:It's not about what you do, it's about doing what you do with love.
Speaker B:Being in the moment similar to mindfulness and, and loving.
Speaker B:What is it?
Speaker B:Loving kindness.
Speaker B:I mean, these are all recurring themes that we've, that we've heard in a number of areas.
Speaker B:And just hearing it again in a different format has helped me to, I think, rekindle, rekindle a commitment to trying to clear my egoic mind of ties, of fear, of inadequacy or lack or, you know, I don't want to do this because I won't get this type of, you know, a tit for tat kind of mentality, which is the egoic mind.
Speaker B:And that was something that I very specifically committed to in August because we were going to the lake with my in laws, which I have not had the best, I have not presented my best self frequently in that situation.
Speaker B:And I committed to myself, I believe, through a desire to present love to my wife, to her family, to support this get together and not be that adversary, not be the one that everybody's worried about walking on eggshells or making a decision because Ryan's going to be upset.
Speaker B:I did not want that.
Speaker B:It was like, whatever happens, whatever we do, I'm fine with it.
Speaker B:I do not want to be that.
Speaker B:I just want to be here to support you guys.
Speaker B:And that was a verbal and mental decision that I made in early August, which led to an amazing time at the lake, spending a lot of time with my nieces and nephews, which I don't see them ever.
Speaker B:And I think that was a second piece of it.
Speaker B:And I'll try and get to that as well.
Speaker B:But the point was, I think that a big part of my amazing August was making this distinct and deliberate commitment to whatever I'm doing now, I'm only going to be doing it from a place of love.
Speaker B:And then it led on to our anniversary and doing this big anniversary thing, which is not something I'm inclined to do usually, which was amazing.
Speaker B:And then what happened?
Speaker B:Well, I think, number one, I wasn't fully aware that potentially that was what was causing this bliss.
Speaker B:School started all those the world chatter and the hubbub got back into swing and I got distracted again, I guess.
Speaker B:And so now I'm really trying to recommit myself to not having those attachments and just trying to present my best loving self to myself, my family, everyone around me.
Speaker B:And I'm hopeful.
Speaker B:And I mean, I can already feel you feel better when you release that tension, whether or not the things that are causing that frustration are still present.
Speaker B:When you can let it go, when you can forgive.
Speaker B:And we talked about this last week, forgiveness is for you, you know, so that you can let it go, move on.
Speaker B:And ironically, we've also been talking about the Ten Commandments, and I was helping teach the middle school kids the past couple of weeks.
Speaker B:And that was also something that came up when it came to, you know, not coveting things and being gracious and grateful for what you have, not living from a point and feeling of lack.
Speaker B:So two things I had mentioned.
Speaker B:Number one, the kids.
Speaker B:So during that time was also the vacation church camp.
Speaker B:And I helped out one day and was.
Speaker B:I found happiness in being around these kids, whether it's my nieces and nephews and my kids, when we're out playing, swimming, you know, at the, at the lake, or the kids in the Christian education program that my.
Speaker B:That my wife has been teaching the innocence and the wonder and the, you know, inquiring mind.
Speaker B:And it really.
Speaker B:I think being around that kind of energy has been really uplifting to me as well.
Speaker B:And the conduit thing hit me like a ton of bricks because I actually use that word and that term and that idea literally in a presentation to the congregation years ago about.
Speaker B:What was it?
Speaker B:I don't know if it was a.
Speaker B:It wasn't a mission moment.
Speaker B:What was the other.
Speaker B:They do these in during service, like a mission moment where somebody comes up and talks about their mission thing.
Speaker B:It might have been.
Speaker B:It was something.
Speaker B:What was it?
Speaker B:Wherever the pledges go, whatever that's called.
Speaker B:And I don't know why I'm drawing a blank on it.
Speaker B:But the point was I was supposed to present on this, and I didn't want to talk about money.
Speaker B:Like, everybody always gets up there and talks about money.
Speaker B:So what I did was I got up there and I wanted to talk about sharing our time and talent, or our talent in particular.
Speaker B:And the.
Speaker B:The speech or whatever went on.
Speaker B:And the core idea behind it was that were all given talent, tools, talent and their work.
Speaker B:We can use them, but they're basically, we are the conduit for God's talent.
Speaker B:Right?
Speaker B:And that was the word that I used.
Speaker B:So when I started hearing this conduit being brought up again and again, I was like, whoa, that's kind of crazy.
Speaker B:That.
Speaker B:That.
Speaker B:And of course, it could also be just ironic, you know, and.
Speaker B:But when I see those synchronicities, they perk my ear up, you know?
Speaker B:So that's been the past couple of weeks, what I've been kind of doing.
Speaker B:I've gone through, I don't know, probably almost 10 hours of this stuff, and it's been pretty good.
Speaker B:I liked it.
Speaker B:And it's trying to bring me back around to hopefully, you know, really committing to the.
Speaker B:Coming from a place of love.
Speaker A:So 10 hours of intentional commitment to.
Speaker B:10 hours of listening to the channelings of Jesus through this mastery stuff.
Speaker B:Okay?
Speaker B:And remembering, you know, that I did make an honest commitment before.
Speaker B:And I am able to let these things go and not have them eat away at me.
Speaker B:And I don't have to choose to go down, you know, and it's not that I don't feel fire in my belly anymore, but when that fire starts to come up, I kind.
Speaker B:I'm taking that intentional moment to say, what am I afraid of now?
Speaker B:I'm creating this frustration.
Speaker B:What can I do about it?
Speaker B:And in most circumstances, I'm able to kind of get that feeling away pretty quickly.
Speaker B:Not 100% and interestingly enough, I guess in the car today, and I don't know the accuracy of this number, but the number is really kind of unimportant.
Speaker B:Was saying something like we make 35,000 decisions a day or something like that.
Speaker B:And of course, they're minute decisions, but in that we have 35,000 chances a day to choose to act in love.
Speaker B:And even if 20,000 of them, we make a fearful choice, that's still a large number of love that we can do.
Speaker B:And making incremental progress to kind of tip that balance gets us forward, we don't have to beat ourselves up.
Speaker B:That, oh, this I've been doing so well, but this time I did the wrong thing and I'm such a terrible person.
Speaker B:That's not going to help anything.
Speaker A:Yeah, a lot, A lot there.
Speaker A:I mean, just.
Speaker A:Just around the last thing you said in terms of, you know, the number of the number of opportunities and what the number.
Speaker A:What are the opportunities that you take?
Speaker A:The intent to practice, the intent to make the choice of love is really key.
Speaker A:Basically, it's the main choice that you don't want to tie to the outcome.
Speaker A:Right, Right.
Speaker A:So we.
Speaker A:So in conversations of God and lots of other places, there's the idea of how you make a choice versus what the outcome is.
Speaker A:And because essentially we can't control outcomes, that's kind of a rule.
Speaker A:And so the intent to say, out of my 30,000, you know, well, I want all 30,000 to be good choices is fine.
Speaker A:Doesn't mean that you have to succeed.
Speaker A:Having the intent is good enough.
Speaker A:And this goes back to basically all religiosity.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Having a model, having guidelines that this is what I want, this is how I want to be.
Speaker A:It doesn't mean you have to be perfect.
Speaker A:Having the intent counts a huge amount.
Speaker A:And.
Speaker A:And this has actually come up a lot in.
Speaker A:In the teachings that I've been doing recently.
Speaker A:So Buddhist trainings of forgiveness and.
Speaker A:And loving kindness that specifically in.
Speaker A:All right, so I'll attribute this specifically to Tower Brak, although it's not unique to her, but that is where I read it.
Speaker A:And she's, you know, giving guidance in forgiveness practice.
Speaker A:And of course, when you are faced with, you know, a terrible injury, a terrible wrong, you're not going to just be able to read, oh, I should be forgiving.
Speaker A:Oh, that's great.
Speaker A:Now let me be forgiving.
Speaker A:And so, you know, her guidance is when you hit one, that's that difficult that you can't even say, just say the words, I forgive you.
Speaker A:Say, I intend to forgive you.
Speaker A:And setting up that intent starts to create the pathways.
Speaker A:And another thing that I was going to say is neurons that fire together wire together, which is, you know, in a way, the neurological neurobiological correlate of practice makes perfect.
Speaker A:So the more you give your opportunity, the more you, you give yourself opportunity to feel a thing, the more you will tend to towards that thing.
Speaker A:Actually, I think that goes back to Buddha too.
Speaker A:Is something like what you think you become.
Speaker A:Where your focus is, is where you go.
Speaker A:All that kind of stuff.
Speaker A:I can't go.
Speaker A:You prompted me to write down a number of things, but they're more, they don't tie back to exactly what you were saying.
Speaker A:So one thing was, oh, the idea of inherent goodness.
Speaker A:And which also comes up in, in conversations with God.
Speaker A:I think God says, essentially, why do you guys keep on choosing not to love now the kind of the opposing fact.
Speaker A:So I made the comment about the Dalai Lama's observation, but then there's also our evolutionary negativity bias.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:So I had said, you know, oh, our culture teaches us to be skeptical and fearful.
Speaker A:And that's true, but a little superficial because, and we've talked about this before, we know that human brains have negativity bias, which is very, very survival oriented.
Speaker A:The problem being that we're not dealing with tigers in our environment anymore.
Speaker A:And that's, that's the problem is that we have culturally outgrown our evolutionary wiring for defensiveness and sensitivity to danger and negativity.
Speaker A:And so just to be realistic, when we try to do these things, it's not just a cultural bias to negativity.
Speaker A:It's not just a cultural bias to criticism and cynicism and skepticism and suspicion.
Speaker A:There's a very real neurological correlate to perceive danger.
Speaker A:And you know, again, this is something we've talked about many, many times, but in a slightly different context.
Speaker A:Now we're talking about the inherent goodness of man and how God wants us to be happy.
Speaker A:And God is giving us the opportunity and telling us here, here it is.
Speaker A:Do you, do you want to do it or not?
Speaker A:All to say it's not our fault.
Speaker A:So in terms of cwg, Conversations with God, I don't think the acronym is any shorter than Conversations with God, actually, in writing it shorter.
Speaker A:Well, I did notice that was missing.
Speaker A:That was kind of a missing piece of the discussion.
Speaker A:And so.
Speaker B:Which is what.
Speaker B:Why we keep doing it.
Speaker B:Yeah, okay.
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:And I Mean, I think.
Speaker A:I think that's a very important and powerful fact and a very.
Speaker A:A very verifiable fact that everybody can verify in their own experience, and everybody can verify by going to reference work and, you know, authoritative sources like, yes, this is a real thing.
Speaker A:We know it scientifically, we know it experientially.
Speaker A:And so in terms of the book, to me, it's kind of a glaring omission where.
Speaker A:And they just kind of gloss over.
Speaker A:It's like, oh, you mean we could have been happy all this time?
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:Well, why weren't we, you know.
Speaker A:Oh, well, you just choose not to.
Speaker A:Like, well, no, you know, it's.
Speaker A:It's not that we just choose not to.
Speaker A:It's that we have a real physiological orientation not to.
Speaker A:And so this is an interesting contradiction to me because I'm saying two different things that people are physiologically good at the same time.
Speaker A:They're physiologically fearful, right?
Speaker B:Yes.
Speaker A:I mean.
Speaker B:Well, I mean that we have a biological defense mechanism that has been fortified over however long we've been on the earth.
Speaker A:So I think that evolutionary neurobiologists would say that the defensiveness goes deeper than the altruism.
Speaker A:Like, I think we know altruism is more recent acquirement, but it doesn't mean that it's real.
Speaker A:I mean, it's so important to us that we die without it.
Speaker A:And yet that's the struggle that we have.
Speaker A:All right, Right.
Speaker A:We have this deep, deep evolutionary defense that is negative by definition.
Speaker A:And then we have this modern neocortex which needs altruism.
Speaker A:Like reptiles don't need affection to survive, but primates do.
Speaker A:So that's the.
Speaker A:That's the catch 22.
Speaker A:That's the struggle.
Speaker A:And I think.
Speaker A:So I guess in a way I'm kind of being reductionist.
Speaker A:I'm saying, oh, it's just biology.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:But I think it's important.
Speaker A:I mean, I think it's some important knowledge to have.
Speaker A:While we're struggling to say there is biological evidence that we are good, there's also biological evidence that it's not our fault when we're not good.
Speaker A:The thing is, the same neocortex that gives us this need for altruism, gives us the ability to choose, and that's where we have to live, which is exactly what you've been talking about.
Speaker A:There we go.
Speaker A:There's a connection is the.
Speaker A:The nature of the choice and being realistic that we have a deep, deep opposing neurobiology to this.
Speaker A:So it's not easy.
Speaker A:It's not easy.
Speaker A:But it doesn't mean that it's not natural.
Speaker A:And that's the, that's the other argument that people try to make is that it's not natural is that man is inherently bad.
Speaker A:Right, right.
Speaker A:You know, the philosophic argument, I'm thinking, I'm picturing in my head right now the, the TV show community where.
Speaker A:Oh, you don't know the TV show community?
Speaker A:Okay, well, you have to go back, you have to look that up.
Speaker A:That is a great show.
Speaker B:Okay.
Speaker A:It's a farcical comedy.
Speaker A:And there's an episode where two main characters oppose each other on the debate team.
Speaker A:And the final challenge is one side has to prove man is bad and one side has to prove man is good.
Speaker A:So that's just a comedic look at, at the issue.
Speaker A:But yes, I mean, I think that the reason that that's a debate and the reason that people disagree about it is because the biological underpinning of the reason is that there are structures and processes supporting both sides of that.
Speaker A:And the negative process is older.
Speaker A:I was going to say stronger.
Speaker A:It's older, which means it's more ingrained.
Speaker A:But it's not stronger.
Speaker A:It's just habit.
Speaker A:It's more developed.
Speaker A:And the positive aspect needs our work in order to be developed, to be as strong as it can be.
Speaker A:It's not that it's weaker, it's that it needs development in order to be strong.
Speaker A:Just like a child is weak and needs to go through growth in order to be strong.
Speaker A:And if the child doesn't have opposition, gravity, you know, gravity and stress, it won't grow up strong.
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker A:So going back to the intent, when you're starting, the intent's enough because you're weak.
Speaker A:I mean, your, your positive aspect is potentially less developed than your negative aspect.
Speaker A:Depending on your, on your experience, your, your negative wiring may be an 800 pound gorilla.
Speaker A:And so you may really have to gradually put yourself through a strength building program to get the positive aspect up to par with that and able to oppose it.
Speaker A:The good news is that that analogy is that metaphor is an empty metaphor because it's not a war, as they say in conversations with God.
Speaker A:It's not a war.
Speaker A:And you don't need to overpower the 800 pound gorilla.
Speaker A:You just need to learn to forgive it.
Speaker A:And there's the magic.
Speaker A:And that's where everything falls apart in terms of all this metaphor.
Speaker A:All my talk about biology, I think, because it takes practice, but once you hit that moment, there can be this magical falling away of the negative.
Speaker A:Thank you for listening to the Tracking Wisdom Podcast.
Speaker A:Join us next time as we continue the discussion.
Speaker A:Don't forget to follow us on Facebook, Instagram and YouTube, and visit www.eth-studio.com for more information and.
