Galatians 6:7--"Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." (KJV)

First off, as written, this presents God as an entity standing apart from Creation (the universe). This is moot for many of us, totally unacceptable for others. It presents God as a sort of celestial big bad Leroy Brown--mess with him, you get stomped. Offend him, break any of his rather arbitrary commandments, you get damned to hell for eternity. This strikes many of us as unfair and unacceptable. But this image of Spirit occurs over and over again--so much so that many atheists seem to think that the God as portrayed (and libelled) in the Bible is the only possible conception of God. This is unfortunate.

God is by definition, infinite. To portray him/her.it/them/whatever as a person is limiting and most inaccurate. God can neither be limited nor defined (not that we don't keep trying)--but can be experienced.

The sowing/reaping part is different. Many people think this means that if you do "evil," you will be punished. But God does not punish, nor judge. God loves, sustains, creates. All of what most of us see as "evil" in the world is the result of people acting as if they were separate from one another, and from God.

It also harks back to the Old Testament thing about "an eye for an eye"--which Jesus repudiated. (Many Christians seem to ignore this point.)

Other people see it as a statement of karma. In both cases, I think this is reading too much into it. Karma is something we have debated at length. My view is that Dick Sutphen nailed it when he said "Wisdom erases karma." That is, karma is not some sort of tit for tat, or a New Age version of "Go's gonna get you for that." IMHO, we are here to experience everything on the physical plane we cannot experience on the spiritual plane, and in doing so, create and define, express and declare what we are, in the highest and grandest and most noble conception of ourselves we can muster.

Therefore, we have experiences that many label as "bad"--poverty, illness, and so forth--because at the soul level, we chose to have them. And unpleasant as they may seem from the ego's point of view, from the soul's point of view, they are no more than little wee speed bumps on the road to sainthood. In the long run, we get what we choose. But "we" includes all of us--at the Highest Level, we are All One--and so reality is co-created.

My revision would be more like "You cannot manipulate the universe: actions have consequences." This isn't nearly as poetic as the KJV, but I think it is a tad more accessible.

(BTW, anyone who thinks this thread is stupid will be happy to know that my wife thinks so too--then again, she thinks that ANY interpretation of scripture is preachy [she is strongly biased against preachers], and presumptious.)

When people limit their belief in god, or what have you, they become hung upon the idea of god as a bodily image or some kind of corporal thing, I agree. They will never be able to see the substance behind the word or message of god such as is presented in the scripture which you have quoted.

For the scripture you quote, I believe I can make this more simple: what goes around comes around. Kind of like 'for every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction'. I have often wondered what the extent to which such a law can be applied and certainly laws do not discriminate, make preferences or have biases, at least not to my knowledge. I see no reason why the laws of the universe should not apply to the laws of society, except in the case that society can act like a non-inertial reference frame in which each individual can not agree to the same general physical laws.

Perhaps to some people life is not fair. They cannot see in their reference frame the general set of circumstances which unfold and evolve in another person's reference frame. No two people will see the same exact event within a society. This contrast may account for opinions, intrigue, gossip and accusation. The image is to be held in the eye of the beholder. If you think it wrong what one man does may not warrant the consequences which you wish.

Now, we have to deal with these new problems and address them in light of the quoted scripture, and that is this: god is the judge.

Well, I was with you until the very end, so to speak.

IMHO, God--however one conceives of him/her/it/them/whatever--does NOT judge. God is love, unconditional love, which neither judges nor punishes.

A faithful action must be committed with motivation. There is no circumstance in which individuals or societies should act soley upon the benefit of another. This "beyond the good Samaritan" system would produce a vast amount of altruism, and as I like to joke, Hitler was an altruist.

However, speaking strictly on the scripture, god's active role as judge to the Israelites begins to recede from the time of Abraham to Moses and definitely begins to take a very passive role by the reign of Saul. This regression may be important in recognizing where the notion of the first commandment comes from and where the second commandment of Jesus, love thy neighbor, comes from.

Jesus's message provokes doubt about a person's actions. Specifically, it provokes the question of motivation: what is your motivation? Is it love? This question to me is the foundation of Christianity. If not, you may be looking in the wrong place; looking to maim, abuse, hurt or spite another.

A faithful action must be committed with motivation. There is no circumstance in which individuals or societies should act soley upon the benefit of another. This "beyond the good Samaritan" system would produce a vast amount of altruism, and as I like to joke, Hitler was an altruist.

.

The word "should" is not in my working vocabulary, since it implies some sort of moral imperative, but I would say that, since at the Highest Level, we are All One, anything that I do which is in my own best interest, is automatically in the best interest of society at large.

When I reach out to someone, and offer them a blessing, or food or clothing or money (which I have done many times, living in a poor neighborhood) it is not in expectation of any sort of thanks or reward, nor out of any fear of punishment if I fail to do so. Rather, I do this simply because it reflects my greatest and grandest conception of myself, and hence serves to further my self-creation and spiritual growth.

People aquire knowledge to give themselves power, they use the material world as a tool and they use society as a means of organizing events.

The emotional state of one individual is the knowledge of his position within society. This emotional state and knowledge give rise to the question: to be or not to be?

If it cannot be love, then what can it be?