Another big question…
DOES GOD SAY YES TO SOME
PRAYERS AND NO TO OTHERS?

EDITOR’S NOTE: I am excited to be able to use this space on the Internet as a place in which we can join together to ignite a worldwide exploration of some of the most revolutionary theological ideas to come along in a long time.

The ideas I intend to use this space for in the immediate future are the ideas found in GOD’S MESSAGE TO THE WORLD: You’ve Got Me All Wrong.  I believe this book (published by Rainbow Ridge Books) places before our species some of the most important “What if” questions that could be contemplated by contemporary society.

The questions are important because they invite us to ponder some of the most self-damaging ideas about God ever embraced by our species.  For example, the statement that…God sometimes answers our prayers and sometimes does not.

Much of the world believes in a God who hears our prayers and sometimes gives us what we ask for and sometimes does not.

This conception of Deity holds that God has reasons for granting or denying our wishes on any particular occasion.

Sometimes (so it is said) what we want for ourselves is not what God knows is “good for us,” so we don’t get it.

Sometimes (so it is said) we have sinned so much that God does not find us “deserving” of having a prayer answered.

Sometimes (so we are told) God gives us all that we have asked for and more—presumably because it is good for us and we are deserving.

Now comes The Great What If . . .

What if God does not grant or deny the prayers of anyone? What if a hoped-for event or condition manifests in our life for another reason entirely?

Would it make a difference? Does it matter? In the overall scheme of things, would it have any significant impact in our planetary experience?

Yes. This would, in fact, offer an opportunity for the biggest breakthrough in human history. We could at last discover, as a global species, the Process of Creation and the alchemy of the universe (a seemingly magical method of transformation or creation).

If we thought there was another reason that one particular outcome rather than another manifests in our lives—a reason having nothing whatsoever to do with our worthiness or the worthiness of our request—it would end our seemingly endless and far too often ruthless drive to please God so that He will answer our prayers. As well, it would launch a worldwide effort to discover what that reason is.

Why do hoped-for events or conditions manifest in our lives if it’s not God’s “mood” that determines whether our wishes are granted? How do miracles happen? What makes dreams come true? And what is at cause when they do not?

If humans thought that God does not grant or deny the prayers of anyone, but that God has simply and lovingly put into place a process for manifestation that does not rely on us being in God’s “good graces” or our request being “good for us,” many humans would no doubt stop praying.

What would be the point of it, they might think, if asking God for what we want and need is not a way to produce it? And so this would be a second reason humanity would put an end to Supplication Theology, replacing it with ApplicationTheology—applying the power of God in our lives, rather than supplicating for it to be applied in our lives.

If our species decided en masse that God does not personally grant or deny prayers, but, rather, has given all of us a mechanism by which all of our desires may be made manifest, religions themselves would be dramatically affected. Some might even disappear. Those that remained would see their missions significantly altered. They would still present themselves as pathways to peace, joy, and paradise, but they would provide insight into how such experiences may be called forth rather than called for. (The latter is a request, the former is a requisition. There is a huge difference.)

Yet if prayers of supplication were to disappear, something would have to come along to replace them as a tool with which to generate hoped-for results as humans faced the day-to-day challenges of life on the earth. And something would come along.

The truth.

God has been telling us from the very beginning, and it is becoming more clear to us every day, that humanity’s Ancient Cultural Story about God personally granting or denying the prayers of individual human beings is plainly and simply inaccurate.

It is okay now to remove this ancient teaching from our current story, and to stop telling this to ourselves and to our children.

God’s role in our lives need not be reduced, however. Indeed, it would be well to increase it. Yet if God does not personally say “yes” or “no” to our prayers, why bother increasing God’s role in our lives?

Because it is God’s power, not God’s disposition that produces the manifestation of a human being’s desires.

That sentence is important enough to qualify as one to be highlighted.

It is God’s power, not God’s disposition, that produces the manifestation of a human being’s desires.

What this means is that it is not whether we are in God’s favor, or whether or not God thinks that granting a particular request would be “good” for us, that determines the outcome of our prayer. It is not God’s mood, it is God’s love which produces the astonishing circumstance of all of our prayers being granted all of the time.

The problem is not that God sometimes says yes and sometimes says no to our prayers, the problem is that we don’t know what “prayer” is.

If someone had told us when we were little children what prayer is, we would find that all of our prayers are answered all the time.

Prayer is an application, not a supplication . . . and most of us think it is the other way around.

Prayer is nothing more than God’s energy, focused. Of course, if you don’t believe in God, it could be psychologically more difficult to focus God’s energy. That is why it was said earlier that you may want to make God more a part of your life—even as you make prayer, in the old style of supplication, less.

God’s energy is not made available to us only under certain conditions (as when God agrees with our prayer, or when we are in God’s “good graces”). God’s energy lives in us, as us, and manifests through us every hour of every day, whether we know it or not—and whether we want it to or not.

We don’t have any choice about this, because God’s energy—which is the power behind creation—is not turn-on-able and turn-off-able. It is always on, every single moment. It is, in fact, Who We Are.

We are, each of us, a manifestation of God’s energy, and how we use the energy that we are determines how we experience the life that we live.

All of this will begin to come together if we continue to revisit this statement: Life itself is nothing more than energy, vibrating at particular and various frequencies. Energy vibrating at certain frequencies produces physical manifestations in the form of objects, situations, circumstances, and events. This occurs because energy attracts energy. Energy impacts upon energy. Two energies produce a third energy. And so it goes, throughout all of life.

Remember always . . .

We are a manifestation of God’s energy, and how we use the energy that we are determines how we experience the life that we live.

Let me offer here what I explained in a passage from the book Happier Than God. The attracting aspect of energy responds not only to what we desire, but also to what we fear. Not only to what we wish to draw to us, but also to what we wish to push away. Not only to what we consciously choose, but also to what we unconsciously select.

“Selecting” from what my friend Deepak Chopra calls “the Field of Infinite Possibilities” is a delicate procedure. It is a matter of what we focus on, whether we want to or not, whether we do it consciously or not.

For instance, if your mind is focused on doubling your income within the next year, but if you have a later thought, the next hour or the next day, that it will be almost impossible for you to do this—if you say to yourself, “Oh, come on, be practical! Pick a goal that you can at least reach”—then you have selected the latest idea, whether you originally wanted to or not, because the switch on your power is always ON; personal creation is always working.

It not only works with your most recent thought or idea, but also with the one to which you give the most frequency and focus and emotional energy.

This explains why some people who seek to use the so-called Law of Attraction or traditional forms of prayer to get something they desperately want often meet up with what they call failure. Then they say, “See? This stuff doesn’t work!” Actually, the process is working perfectly. If you experience yourself wanting something desperately, and if you keep saying to yourself I want that!, you are announcing to the universe that you do not now have it.

(Unless you are simply using the word “want” as a figure of speech. Most people are not. When most people say that they “want” something, they are very clear that it is because they experience that they do not now have it.)

As long as you hold such a thought, you cannot have it, because you cannot experience on the one hand what you are confirming on the other that you do not.

To use one example, the statement, “I want more money” may not draw money to you, but may actually push it away.

This is because the universe has only one response in its vocabulary: “Yes.”

It responds to your energy. It listens most of all to what you are feeling.

If you constantly say, “I want more money!”,  God will say, “Yes, you do!” If you think, “I want more love in my life!”,  God will say “Yes, you do!”

The universe “feels your energy” around the question of money or love, or anything else for that matter, and if it is a feeling of lack, this is what the universe will respond to. And it will produce more of that. The universe is a big copying machine. It duplicates what’s put into it.

We are talking about power here. We are talking about the power of prayer. But prayer is more than simply what we ask for. Prayer is our every thought, word, and deed. In fact, asking for something is actually the weakest path toward getting it, because asking for something is an affirmation that you do not now have it.

Putting all this another way, your energy has the power of a magnet. Remember that even feeling (actually, especially feeling) is energy, and in the matter of energy, Like Attracts Like.

The idea is to step into the application of the power of God, not a supplication to God that the power be used. God’s invitation is to utilize the confirmative power of prayer. How? How is this done? Well, here’s an example: “Thank you God for sending me my perfect mate.” Here’s another example: “All the money I need is coming to me now.” And here’s my favorite prayer: “Thank you, God, for helping me to understand that this problem has already been solved for me.”

This shift from supplication to application can be miraculous. These are not affirmations. These are confirmations. There is a huge difference. An affirmation seeks to produce an outcome or an experience. A confirmation announces that the outcome has already been produced.

On the very day that I was putting together this chapter I received the following email in my box in response to an article I had written on this subject.

“Dear Neale,” the letter said, “I have a difficult time believing that God/my soul is so literal regarding ‘wanting.’ Doesn’t God/ my soul know what I really mean/intend? God bless, Gerry.”

I wrote back:

Dear Gerry . . . It is not a question of God, or your soul, being so “literal” regarding “wanting.” It is a question of how the Mechanism of Creation works. This is mechanism we are talking about here, not a Being in the sky who takes you literally or does not. This is a machine that runs based on the fuel that is put into it. It is a copying machine, and it has no preference as to what it duplicates. Nor does it try to interpret what its owner wants to make copies of. It simply duplicates the energy that is put into it. In this sense, it is like a computer. You’ve heard this acronym, I’m sure: GIGO. That stands for: Garbage In, Garbage Out.

One of the great misunderstandings that humans hold about God is that God has a preference in the matter of how life is experienced by each of us. God loves us, for sure, but God has no such preference—any more than you have a preference as to whether your children pay “tag” or “hide-and-seek” when they go out to the backyard. All you want them to know is that you are there if they need you. And so it is with God.

There are seven billion sentient beings on this planet—and this planet is one of seventy trillion-billion planets in the cosmos. To functionalize this breathtakingly expansive life God has put into place a spectacular apparatus, and its workings have nothing to do with Deity’s personal preference. They have to do with Deity’s genius.

The genius of the system is that it is Pure Energy, reacting to Energy by reproducing in physical form what is put into it by all sentient beings in the form of their thoughts, words, and actions—which, in turn, are based on what humans call “feelings” . . . which, in turn, are simply other forms of energy.

Do you get the picture?

God does not answer some prayers and fail to answer others. God answers all prayers, sending to The Collective the Energy that duplicates what The Collective is thinking/saying/doing/feeling. God does so, as well, on an individual basis with each source of energy output. (That is, with every human being, and every sentient creature in the universe.) Is this quite remarkable? Yes. Is it the result of God’s personal preference in the matter of what is manifest moment-to-moment in the cosmos? No.

In using God’s Energy, the word “I” is the ignition key of creation. What follows the word “I” turns the key and starts the engine of manifestation.

Thus, when it “looks as if ” Personal Creation is not working it is only because the Primal Energy has brought you what you inadvertently selected rather than what you thought you chose.

If the power were not always ON, if the process was not always working, you could have a single very positive thought about something and that outcome would be made manifest in your reality without fail. But the process works all the time, not just part of the time, and is fed by that which you feel most deeply, most consistently. So a single very positive thought in a whirlwind of not-so-positive ideas and projections is not likely to produce the desired result.

The trick is to stay positive in a sea of negativity. The trick is to know that the process is working even when it looks as if it is not. The trick is to “judge not by appearances.” The trick is to stay in the space of gratitude for everyone outcome and experience, every circumstance and situation.

Gratitude eliminates negativity, disappointment, resentment, and anger. And when those emotions disappear, room is made for the energy of love for God, for life, and for yourself to reappear—now more fully than ever.

What a God we have! What a Deity is ours, to have created such a foolproof, magnificent, miraculous process, allowing each of us to announce and declare, express and fulfill, experience and become Who We Really Are.

Please Note: The mission of The Global Conversation website is to generate an ongoing sharing of thoughts, ideas, and opinions at this internet location in an interchange that we hope will produce an ongoing and expanding conversation ultimately generating wider benefit for our world. For this reason, links that draw people away from this site will be removed from our Comments Section, a process which may delay publication of your post. If you wish to include in your Comment the point of view of someone other than yourself, please feel free to report those views in full (and even reprint them) here.
Click here to acknowledge and remove this note:
  • mewabe

    Negativity originates in unexpressed pain, which causes suffering.

    I suggest that the key to manifesting good outcomes in life is to release negativity by expressing all our feelings, thus releasing them.

    • mewabe,

      My friend, you never disappoint. 🙂

      Unfortunately, since most of our thoughts remain repressed in the unconscious and subconscious mind, and many reflect the ancient ideas of not enough (thereby creating conflict and war) or having to do more than breathe to earn our portion, what we humans often create are our own nightmares. It is only through meditation that I have come to understand this for myself.

      When I first started, like most my head was a jumble of thoughts. “How w does one stop thinking?” was a prevalent one which turned into a sort of mantra. I eventually came to understand that for me it was important to acknowledge each thought that came up, and then let it go, without judgment.

      By doing so, I was able to access the nightmares in my mind, acknowledge them, and let them go, each time they appeared. In this way, they both appeared less often and became less nightmarish.

      I don’t know if I will ever achieve more than the minutes or moments of connectedness I feel when utterly silent. I do know, though, that the thoughts I have now are often inspirational rather than logical and lead me to better places. And they’re probably better answers than to any prayer I’ve said.

      There is a mechanism by which we can create through the energies of our thoughts, words, and deeds. I’ve used it myself with a bit of success. We are either unaware of it, or infants in its use, however.

      Love and Blessings,
      ~Annie

      • mewabe

        Thanks Annie!

        I got the intuitive understanding a long time ago that we could create and manifest anything in our lives, beneficial or destructive….that we are totally responsible for what we create (I knew this as a very young child for some strange reason, and used to review my days to see how I caused some unpleasant situations).

        Later I understood that the key to manifesting good things was to become more and more conscious, because a lot of negativity gets stored in the unconscious. I understood that the way to “clear” this negativity or “darkness” was to shed light onto it, meaning to bring it to full consciousness.

        There are many ways to do this, and meditation works well as you are finding out 🙂 It is a gentle way. I use a different way, through feelings, but many paths leads to becoming fully conscious, which is the true meaning of enlightenment, or shedding light onto all of the aspects of the self, including the unknown and hidden parts of the unconscious, so that we become integrated and united as one being within ourselves and all inner divisions and conflicts vanish.

        That’s when peace comes, and when we can create consciously, rather than unconsciously as most people and the entire world do, thus feeling victimized by their own unconscious creations.

        • mewabe,

          I understand and have worked through feelings as well. That’s much of what I did in therapy for two years.

          I will say, briefly, that I have had now also an experience of being willing to pass over when I was recently near death. It’s a complicated story. The important part is that I had the same feeling of expansion, and of joy. Then I was suddenly back.

          I’m guessing that I’m not quite finished here yet. 😉

          Love and Blessings,
          ~Annie

          • mewabe

            On the “other side” people are actually so much more alive and vibrant than most of us are here…perhaps not all, but the ones I have communicated with…they are indeed “full of life”.

            We can be here as well, but to do this I think we all need to be better aligned with the natural world (the “cosmos”) and its energies. People forget that nature is not just a pretty landscape…it is a very powerful energy field with which we need to connect in order to bloom at all levels, including the spiritual level.

            Love and blessings Annie…

          • Patrick Gannon

            Prove that “other side” exists Mewabe, and you’ll be up for a Nobel Prize. I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, but I don’t see objective evidence to support the idea. To be completely honest with yourself, you must admit to yourself that it “could” be a delusion… right?

          • mewabe

            Yes, of course it could be a delusion. Why not? There are many delusions, including that idea that we are presently civilized, or the idea of separation from and superiority to nature that civilization promotes.

            But if you apply pure logic, you have to observe that everything in this universe exists in polarity: day and night, male and female, life and death, up and down, inside and outside, past and future, etc etc…

            Consequently it seems reasonable to assume that there are two sides to everything, including the visible and the invisible, the form and the formless, the physical and the spiritual. It seems logical enough.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Yes, it does seem logical enough; but it also seemed logical that the sun circled the earth. I appreciate that you are so open minded and willing to accept all the possibilities. There isn’t enough of that kind of attitude, in my view.

            What are your thoughts on this idea… Many New Agers love the “We are all ONE” concept. I love it myself, even if I doubt it (which I suppose is akin to Evangelicals doubting the Holy Spirit – the unforgivable sin!). Most ‘believers’ seem to have this idea that we will retain our individuation, our identity, our consciousness, our memories when/if we rejoin the ONEness. What seems more logical to me, is that we rejoin the ONEness as a drop of water rejoins an ocean. We return to the ALL, but we lose our identity. The uniqueness of the drop of water is lost forever. So too, perhaps for our “selves.” Isn’t this really the experience of ONEness that we get when we meditate? We lose all sense of self.

          • mewabe

            This idea of the drop of water returning to the ocean is actually an eastern idea…but whether or not we loose our actual identity, I think that we probably expend and loose some of our limitations…something that, as you point out, can be done in meditation. It can also be achieved by using “psychedelic” drugs as Timothy Leary experimented with in the 60’s (I never used drugs or alcohol), and other means that for example traditional shamans use (trance, etc), which lead them to having out of body experiences etc.
            The physical brain, the mind and consciousness are the last frontier, and the most interesting and relevant in my opinion. But without wisdom and compassion, without love and empathy, without sensitivity, the knowledge of the brain could lead to some extremely bad situations for humanity.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Yeah, but brain research could also lead to some amazingly good situations for humanity as well. This is an argument made about any new technical advance from the time the first cave man brought fire home to cook his dinner, and of course it’s correct. Frankly I think the whole Garden of Eden myth is a story about the power of knowledge as well as the associated dangers. However, we could cure Alzheimer’s, fix personality disorders, treat autism, Parkinsons’ etc. I think it would be irresponsible not to try if we have the ability.

            We’re humans. We’re a very young species. We’re going to screw up a lot more in the centuries and millennia ahead, if we survive.

          • mewabe

            I understand and agree about the potential benefits of any quest for knowledge, in the hands of wise people. However you might have noticed that the focus of our human civilization seems to be to control everything. This is, in itself, a mistake. Most would not agree with my last statement, because of cultural brainwashing (such as the thoughts that control and power are either neutral or good).

            A focus on control is always rooted in fear, real or imaginary (for example, governments attempt to control populations when they fear them). When the form of knowledge that is sought and obtained does not alleviate that fear but leads to ever an greater desire for control, meaning to ever greater fears, the logical conclusion must be that it is not a type of knowledge that benefits humanity psychologically (some would say “spiritually”).

            Screwing up is not necessary…all we need is to follow nature. The intrinsic quality of nature is balance. When we oppose nature, attempting to control and master it, we create chaos, such as is seen in the human world and in a now imbalanced ecology from pollution etc. This should be easily understood, if it were not for own own cultural trance and self-hypnosis, imagining ourselves separate from and above nature and the masters of our domain. Working gently with nature rather than against it, we could very rapidly and very happily evolve indeed.

  • Stephen mills

    I get this but what about situations like Syria millions of people want the conflict and violence to end (as observed by people fleeing the country ) but the few continue the destruction of the country and people’s lives .If the collective energy was strong enough surely the conflict would naturally resolve itself .Instead of a few causing misery and terror !!
    How much positive energy does it take to change these events !
    We can’t even muster up enough energy to stop a war in one country on the planet what hope is there of the unifying of the Earths nations to stop all war .

    So much conflict of interest so much garbage going in so it spews forth its waste product ,war ,terror ,violence and superiority suffocating the life of humans .As we watch our children being washed up on beaches on the shores of Europe we turn a blind eye to the suffering we are causing .

    • mewabe

      The way I see it humanity is currently still exploring the outer limits of the idea of separation. It is creating nightmarish events everywhere, and it seems that more will have to be created and at a global and massive level until the paradoxical situation of one global nightmare that affects every living being and every life form awakens humanity to the reality of oneness.

      In other words, the same scenario as when a local disaster strikes and everyone looses everything, and all are in the same sinking boat, and realize that they better reconnect and cooperate with each other and help each other if they are to survive and recover…but at a much more massive, worldwide scale and at a deeper and more expanded level of consciousness.

      And this, believe it or not, is, the way I understand it, actually a shortcut to evolution…a brutal awakening humanity chose long ago.

      • Patrick Gannon

        Or it could all be a simple matter of evolution. It seems to me that we are what we are, because this is what we evolved to be and there’s nothing good, bad or indifferent about it – it’s simply what IS. Maybe we’re looking for more than there really is. Maybe there is no reality of “oneness” outside of the atomic level – the particles that all of us are made out of – the enriched guts of stars. I think it will depend on what we learn about consciousness in the decades and centuries ahead (assuming we haven’t overflowed our petri dish and are about to self-destruct).

        • mewabe

          It all depends on what you understand by “oneness”. Oneness to me means that everything is interconnected and interdependent. This does not appear to be a mystical concept but a very scientific fact, at least as far as our planet is concerned.
          This is the meaning of “garbage in, garbage out”…”the system is a closed loop”…”we reap what we sow”…”what we do to nature we do to ourselves or our descendants”…etc.
          This is what oneness means.
          We have “evolved” technologically, but not necessarily at other levels. We might have more knowledge, but what do we use it for? To better exploit, kill, torture or oppress each other. Is this evolution? Are scientists working for the US Navy on anti-matter weaponry actually evolved? Is the idea of deploying weapons in space to control the entire world an evolved idea? Aren’t we more accurately technologically advanced barbarians?

          • Patrick Gannon

            Mewabe, it seems to me that you have a common misconception about what evolution is. It seems to me that you are defining evolution in terms of good and bad; insinuating that more evolved equates to being more “civilized,” but that’s not the case at all. Evolution is completely independent of what is good or bad – it is focused on what survives and what passes its genes along. How that happens is not associated with “morality” or “ethics” in any way at all, at least not from the standpoint of genes, for which, some propose, we are simply an electro-mechanical carrier. They say evolution is not about “us” or any other “organism” but is all about the genes of said organisms – that is what is actually evolving and replicating, and the organisms themselves are simply a carrier that is continually modified for the benefit of the genes they carry. It’s an interesting theory with growing evidence to support it.

            People like Tom Campbell (My Big TOE), propose that consciousness itself can evolve and he puts it in terms of thermodynamics and entropy, and suggests that “love” is a form of reduced entropy that consciousness can evolve towards – also an interesting idea; but one that is unproven of course. It could be true if consciousness is something that transcends the brain; a big IF. While you point out some of the ways that our group consciousness (if there is such a thing) has room for improvement, we can look at history and see that our species has made some amount of progress in reducing sexism, racism, genocide, etc. since the last religious “messengers” taught us that these things were acceptable and even good.

            It’s also important to note that we have only been here as a species for an eyeblink of time. If we survive, what will we be 10,000 years from now?

  • Well said & articulated Neale. Masterfully laid out & displayed!

    For me personally, I see it this way:
    For the most part individuals & the world collective live in a default mode of negative consciousness & unconsciousness a majority of time. Thus, while many want peace, they often unwittingly select non peace as the norm. They feel powerless to the present & are heavily influenced based on past history which is very powerful belief agent.

    They (we) are unaware of the power of unregulated negative thinking/feeling that goes unchallenged a majority of the time. That means we have a lot working against our better nature. It’s hidden because so much negativity is seen as the norm & is unattended to most of the time.

    So re-arranging our priorities of thought & feelings that are most dominant from day to day hour to hour etc needs to be re-programed in order to get more of the peace & positive stuff we truly desire.

    We may fail to realize how deeply embedded we are to this chronic habitual negative default thinking we unwittingly have succumbed to.

    So it’s a major in fact, monumental feat to unbreak this habit, reprogram our dominant thoughts & feelings.

    I often say we don’t have to monitor our every little thought & explicate & scrutinize them to death. Instead, we can gently guide our thoughts to better thoughts, better feelings. We are gentle/forgiving/compassionate on our missteps in this & thus move forward in kindness & love. To ourselves & others.

    This is a major task for the vast majority of people & even for those of us light workers who feel we are awake to what ever degree we are.

    I have programed myself to think/feel positively a majority of the time, to catch negative thoughts & feelings most of the time. I feel it’s about 75-85% of the time. Thus, negative thoughts/feelings are not allowed to go burrow underground & fester some where & grow. Not as much anyway.

    Yet I really worked & played at honing this just like a jazz piano player spending years if not decades mastering his craft. Mastering our own inner dialog/self talk may be the most important thing to master in this life.

  • mewabe

    When we truly understand that all life is one, and that we are consequently not only connected to all life but in some expanded ways are all life, what could we possibly be lacking and wanting?

    Absolutely nothing…all we have to do is to participate in the dance of creation, of which we are a part and which also dances within us. There is no possible gift that has not already been given, because there are no separations between the giver, the receiver and the gift.

    So there is an important difference between saying “we are all one”, meaning humans, and “all life is one”, meaning all life.

    • NealeDonaldWalsch

      I agree with everything that you have said here, my friend. The first message of the 25 Core Messages of Conversations with God, spelled out clearly in the book WHAT GOD SAID, is this: “All things are One Thing. There Is only One Thing, and all things are part of the One Thing There Is.”

      This makes it very clear that the statement “we are all one” does not refer only to the oneness of human beings, and everything in the CWG writings reenforces that truth. Yes, “from atoms to galaxies and everything in between,” there is only One Thing: what the CWG Cosmology calls The Essential Essence. The Pure Energy. The Cosmic Substance that is often referred to in the message as The Stem Cell of the Universe, the Primal Source — and what I find it joyous to call “God.”

      This Source is more, however, than simply an amorphous substance or some formless energy. It has attributes, qualities, characteristics. In human language we might call them Love, Awareness, Wisdom, and Desire. It has a Sense of Itself and engages in Conscious Expression of Itself. It also responds to Itself. That is, The Essential Essence is a Pure Energy that produces an Effect which has an Affect on the Effect Itself.

      This means that any Part of the Effect can Affect the Effect that the Effect has on Itself. Or, to put it simply, we are all Centers of Creation, even as is That which we call The Creator Itself. Put in the terms of certain theologies, we were made in the Image and Likeness of God. Put in terms articulated by some physicists, nothing that is observed in Unaffected by The Observer.

      These are the understandings I have been given in my conversations with God. I could, of course, be wrong about all of this. Yet I believe that if the people of this planet lived by what I believe to be these simple truths, the world would change overnight.

      • mewabe

        Neale, I am very glad to learn that “we are all one” means “all is one” in the way you use it, and that people understand it this way!

        I agree with all you have written in your comment as well…including that the Divine essence that permeates all life (in which we all have our being and which also lives within us) has these attributes, as well as pure intelligence and infinite knowledge. I have actually felt it years ago, through spending time in the wilderness alone (nature is my “church” and I believe a more direct and unaltered expression of the essence and power of Divinity than civilization, which is a mental creation rooted in some serious and dangerous misconceptions, and whose restrictive characteristics mirror our mental limitations).

        I hope humanity proves itself to be ready for change, before it shed any more of its blood and further alters the ecological balance of the earth. I saw the future of the world in an out of body experience in 1994, and I was shown that it will get much worse before there is a final and global (and beautiful) transformation. But nothing is written in stone…

  • Leon Jackson

    Awesome article Bro. Neale. That needs to be taught in our churches and by parents to their children for sure. The power that is within each and everyone of us is incredible and amazing. All we have to do is realize that it’s there and nothing will be impossible for us. God/Life/Divinity is good and is good all the time.

    • NealeDonaldWalsch

      I am very happy that you have found the passage helpful, my friend. Now if you really want to get on board with getting this word out to parents so that they can share it with their children, I invite you to become a Stealth Spiritual Messenger and put it into the hands of as many people as possible. Simply copy and paste the message above, share it with everybody on your Facebook page, send it to everyone in your personal address book, and tell people where it came from.

      The book GOD’S MESSAGE TO THE WORLD: You’ve Got Me All Wrong could change people’s lives, and life on this planet, if it was read by enough people. Share it, share it, share it.

      (Unless you don’t. It’s up to you. But there IS something we can all do in this world, to make our lives and our planet better, and this is one of them. If you did nothing more than start a discussion among others, it could only help. Thanks for considering it.)

      Blessings………neale.

      • Leon Jackson

        I definitely will Neale.

  • Patrick Gannon

    Neale said: “What if God does not grant or deny the prayers of anyone?

    I have to say it: What if the reason God does not grant or deny the prayers of anyone is that there is no God to grant or deny prayers?

    A couple thoughts on this column. First the criticism of other religions that this whole series entails seems at odds with the oft repeated mantra – “Ours is not a better way, ours is merely another way.” Isn’t the main message here, that Neale’s way is better than the old way? He seems to think it’s better, and has put a lot of effort into attempting to show why it is better; but it’s undeniable that there is a very important similarity to other religions – the reliance on belief.

    Next is the subject of prayer vs. the so-called “Law of Attraction.” Is there really any difference? As a point of interest, there is no “law” involved. A “law” in this sense is defined as: “a statement of fact, deduced from observation, to the effect that a particular natural or scientific phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions are present.” The “second law of thermodynamics” is such an example. Understand that if someone had proven the LOA, they would have been awarded the Nobel Prize by now.

    I struggle to accept the Law of Attraction (LOA). The first question I have is, to what extent do thoughts create reality? You never hear of any limits on this idea. Theoretically I should be able to manifest a pink unicorn, shouldn’t I? What are the limits, if any, on this ability for thoughts to create reality? Proponents of the LOA seldom, if ever, discuss limits. I will agree that if I am willing to sit here long enough, I can manifest a pink unicorn. It may take trillions upon trillions of years, but if I wait long enough, probability dictates that it will eventually happen. I don’t have that much time though, so what are the practical limits?

    It’s confusing. We’re told our thoughts create reality, but how many of us are thinking about slipping on a banana peel when it happens? Everyone believed and thought that the Titanic was unsinkable. The Law of Attraction would seem to indicate that it could never sink under these circumstances, but there you go… Did all those people really, secretly believe that it was going to sink? What about when it doesn’t work even if you did everything right? Did you ever fail to get a present that you absolutely, fully and confidently expected to receive as a child – like a pony or a BB gun or bicycle for Christmas? How could that happen if the LOA was a real process? I recall being totally stunned when my firmly believed in expectations failed to materialize as a kid.

    How about manifesting fear? Anyone remember the Y2K event when it was thought that all the computers in the world might shut down because the original computer dating systems didn’t support years over 1999? If the Law of Attraction was right, shouldn’t there have been a global meltdown? I recall that time and the fear was real and palpable. It made for good business in the tech industry and turned out to be a good thing for the economy. How many people had full expectation that something cataclysmic was going to happen on Dec. 21, 2012 when the Mayan calendar reset? People were so convinced that they went out and built bomb shelters and bought food and supplies in preparation, yet the anticipated event, never materialized. Clearly there were a great many people who were fully convinced and acting in full expectation that the event was going to occur. I remember some of the interviews. The belief was absolute in those people. Why didn’t it happen? What about the absolute belief of all the “end-of-time” predictions that failed to materialize? How many people have followed charismatic religious leaders such as William Miller in 1843 who sold all their worldly goods in preparation for the end of the world? How does the LOA apply to that? Think about how strongly you would have to believe, to be stupid enough to sell all your worldly goods because a religious preacher told you the world was ending? Is it a question of competing with billions of other people with different wants and beliefs? Does God have a “Belief-O-Meter” that dictates who wins? What about competition? If millions of people in California are “attracting” rain to end the drought, and a thousand people who want to play golf are “attracting” sun, who wins? And that little girl, diseased and starving to death in a slum in India, she’s not doing a very good job of manifesting a good reality, so whose fault is that?

    One of my concerns about the LOA, is the victim mentality it appears to set up. If you didn’t succeed, then it’s your fault. You didn’t do it right. You didn’t try hard enough. It’s pretty much the same argument Christians use when prayer doesn’t work. You didn’t believe hard enough. It’s your own fault. Everything bad that happens, the LOA says, is your own fault, because you create your own reality. My skepticism alert goes off when I see the “out” that Neale gives to the LOA: “ Thus, when it “looks as if ” Personal Creation is not working it is only because the Primal Energy has brought you what you inadvertently selected rather than what you thought you chose.” It’s your fault. You did it wrong. You goofed. You “inadvertently selected” the wrong thing. Of course proving that someone “inadvertently selected” the wrong choice is another matter altogether. How many of us have memories of inadvertently selecting the opposite of what we wanted and believed we would get? The kid who just knew he was getting a new bicycle for his birthday sure didn’t make that mistake. It almost seems like the Christian “unforgiveable sin” thing. You can be as holy as any saint, and believe all the right things about Jesus, but if you inadvertently selected to doubt the holy spirit just for a moment – then you’re doomed; no second chances. What about the small child who is raped, hacked into pieces and thrown in the river? What did this child do to “attract” this horror? Is it a matter or karma? Are they being “punished” for something they did in another life – attracting some evil they may have been responsible for, so that it might be visited on them here and now? That doesn’t jive well with Neale’s position that his god has no need for punishment. It’s very difficult to buy into the idea that this child attracted that misery to herself by manifesting her own reality. That, it seems to me, could only be Neale’s God manifesting its own horrific reality, just like Bible God!

    Let’s say I want something, and I go out and work hard for it. I study, I research, I practice, I do everything I can and then achieve my goal. But who gets the credit? Not me. Some God who sent me what I supposedly asked for and wanted and believed in hard enough, gets the credit. I didn’t succeed on my own; I was helped by some God to manifest my reality based on what I believed. My job is to believe, and if I believe hard enough, God will give it to me. How is this any different from mainstream religion? It strikes me as demeaning to the “self” to award rightfully earned credit to some invisible deity for which there is no evidence.

    What about the potential physical dangers of this belief? Let’s say I’m a 15 year old creating my own reality. I can fly. I can ride this bicycle down that hill, up the ramp and over a row of parked cars because I believe in myself and I believe with every fiber of my being that I can do it – then bang; I’m in the hospital with half the bones in my body broken. Oh, and by the way, since I didn’t make it, that means it was my fault – not because I’m an idiot who went with beliefs rather than knowledge, but because I didn’t believe hard enough. I didn’t manipulate energy well enough to create the reality I fully expected, so it’s my fault, right? Or might the fault come down to being foolish enough to place belief before knowledge?

    There is some evidence, not yet understood or fully explained that indicates “observation” (i.e. measurement) may affect particles at the microscopic level. This evidence from quantum mechanics is used by people like Deepak Chopra to “prove” that the LOA and all that follows from it is scientifically valid. This is pseudoscientific marketing nonsense, not evidence for the LOA. When intelligent and knowledgeable people hear this nonsense, the BS alert goes off and the skepticism level rightfully increases. As to Quantum Physics and the LOA – when we can shoot refrigerators through dual slits and change where they impact based on our observations, then we can revisit this line of inquiry.

    Certainly, having a positive outlook is beneficial to us. Reviewing actions in your mind is helpful – athletes do it all the time. Learning to focus on something and staying tuned to it, may help you accomplish it. The placebo effect is real. This is an interesting area of study. If belief affects the brain in such a way as to instruct it to do things that help a body heal, for example, then we need to understand what electrical and chemical or other reactions are emitted by the brain as a result of belief, as this could prove to be very beneficial and move us out of pseudoscience into real science. We can manually stimulate out-of-body experiences (OBE) now. If we can figure out how to stimulate whatever it is that causes the placebo effect, that could put the brain to work for us in new ways to heal our own bodies.

    • mewabe

      Many beliefs do have a strong effect on the brain…neurologists have studied this at least since the 1970’s…and have discovered that “feel good” beliefs can act as opiates, suppressing emotional pain, anxiety, fears, etc. But they are only a band aid, not a source of permanent healing, and like most opiates must be used daily.

      This is why many people who are suffering emotionally cling to the crucial belief that they are loved by their God (or Jesus, etc). They need this more than food in order to function…because without it they may have to face the inner devastation of their emotional wounds and distress.

      So religion is not just about ideas and concepts…it can be used as a kind of drug, that affects the brain to release feel good chemicals (dopamine, etc). This is how many cling to such religious beliefs desperately, as addicts cling to drugs or alcohol. This is why you cannot have a rational conversation with certain believers (fundamentalists come to mind, of all 3 Abrahamic religions).

      The healing process however comes not from discussing beliefs, but by-passing them (many are merely a defense against pain) and going straight to the root of the problem: emotional pain…something that afflicts much of humanity.

      • Patrick Gannon

        Interesting comment about belief offering temporary relief to some conditions. That sounds reasonable. Your suggestion that our development is affected more than we know while in the womb, also sounds very reasonable. We know for sure that the fetus is affected as a result of the substances good or bad that the host mother imbibes. Emotions are going to create the same stresses in the developing fetus since the same blood is shared.

        It also raises the question of how responsible we really are for all our actions. If our brains are impacted negatively during our development and this leads to personalities being formed that act out life in hostile or negative ways; how much responsibility do these individuals really bear? I guess this comes down to figuring out where the damage is being done. Is the “consciousness” or self being damage, or is the brain, which perhaps projects what is only an illusion of consciousness and self, the thing that is damaged?

        • mewabe

          “Emotions are going to create the same stresses in the developing fetus since the same blood is shared.”
          You hit the nail on the head right there (there is scientific research on this…a mother’s stresses actually affect the brain development of the fetus in very negative ways).

          Traditionally and in old cultures, as in Japan for example, pregnant women were advised to avoid all sorts of stresses, particularly emotional…it’s common sense, but common sense and sensitivity towards life are in short supply in contemporary society.

          As far as responsibility, we may not be responsible for everything that “happens” to us, particularly when we are helpless fetuses and infants, but we are, later in life, responsible for how we deal with our own problems, we are responsible for obtaining information, and for making the intelligent choice to heal ourselves. And when an individual is really damaged to the point of not being able to take personal responsibility, society should be responsible for doing everything possible to promote his or her healing….and preventing, through the education or training of parents, any more damaged children.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Maybe. When a person with mental illness commits a crime, we don’t call him or her responsible. If it turns out that consciousness is a product of the brain, where does that lead us? I’m not saying that it is, but what if that turns out to be the case? This conversation would not be “you” and “me” talking to each other, it would really be our brains conversing with each other and giving each of us (or maybe only one of us – maybe there’s really only “me” here!), the illusion that our “selves” are consciously participating.

            Neale has been asking this series of “what if” questions, but as I see it, they simply come down to “what if” we exchange his “new” beliefs for some older beliefs, but both sets of beliefs are based on deities for which no evidence exists. Both sets of beliefs presuppose God and an afterlife. What if we look at the more difficult scenarios? What if there is no God, no consciousness without a brain, no afterlife? That’s a much more difficult “what if” question, but we avoid it like the plague. What if we faced up to it? What if, when we die, we’re simply dead, and we return to the nothingness from which we came? Would that idea be too frightening? Why?

          • mewabe

            The idea of life ending completely would not bother me in the least.
            I experience reality wholly in the present, or at least I try as much as I can…rather than living life in past memories or future expectations.

            It’s an art, to be cultivated (living completely in the present), because our cultural conditioning teaches us to endlessly postpone the present for the sake of the future (beginning in school and ending in retirement).

            I have what you could call a strong intuition about an expended life (consciousness beyond the boundaries of the physical), but even this is for me totally about the present, Not being Christian and having always refused to be mentally and emotionally polluted by any religion, I have never cared about getting to something called “heaven”, rather I have sought to make this present reality as enlightened as I could.

            So the answer again is no, I couldn’t care less about life after death. All I care about is the here and now, without which there would never be any future anyway.

            As far as a “God”, all I know if that there is a form of fundamental energy that appears to be intelligent enough to organize itself in extremely complex patterns, in a way that is harmonious to the whole. I have always been totally turned off (repulsed is more accurate) by the personal fatherly God of the Abrahamic religions. I don’t mind the “great mystery” (native American) or the “unnameable origin” (Taoist). This energy to me is not a person or even close to it…I find the idea completely ridiculous and very primitive.

            I had a sort of dream-vision (Native American style) long ago that showed me that this energy was neither good nor bad…it was beyond all human judgment, because it was absolutely everything, all life. I saw it as a ball of light, symbolically, that contained everything unto itself, manifest and unmanifest. The best way to describe it would be to say that it had infinite energy and intelligence. This is not the whole story but I cannot give away the complete vision…

          • Patrick Gannon

            Interesting comment about the brain and consciousness arising together, but I’m not sure it matters if the one thing (consciousness) is unable to exist without the other thing – (the brain). We know that consciousness doesn’t continue to exist in this physical matter reality when the brain dies. The question is whether there are other non-physical matter realities, as some people propose. How things like memories which are perceptions of information, that are stored in the matter of our brains can be transported and accessed in a non-material way strikes me as a challenging question. How is that data organized, stored, transported, accessed when the hard drive – the brain – is destroyed?

    • Here we go again, Patrick,

      No, you don’t “have to say it.” It’s your choice to say it. At least hold yourself responsible for your own choices.

      Neale doesn’t promote just the LOA. For calling yourself so well read in Neale’s work, I’m surprised that you’ve forgotten all about the Mechanics of Manifestation, of which the LOA is only the first step. Or that we (humanity) affect each other’s energy, so that if you choose to manifest a pink unicorn (what is it with you and pink unicorns, anyway?) and no one else on the planet does, then it’s not likely to manifest.

      You disappoint, Patrick, with so much repetition.

      ~Annie

      • Patrick Gannon

        Figure of speech, Annie; just like “Oh my God.” But you’re right. I did “choose” to keep the debate going. It’s an open forum.

        Once again Annie, you’re putting words in my mouth. Please show me where I said that Neale “just” promotes the LOA. It happens to be the major part of his column this month.

        Once again Annie, you don’t respond to my points of contention – you go after me personally. As for being disappointed with repetition – good God woman – have you read the man’s books? Many of them say the same things over and over again in many different words and ways. I commented on this in a post several months ago, and Neale himself admitted this and explained why he does this and the confirmed the importance of repetition. You can’t accuse me of repetition without going back through a couple years worth of Neale’s posts here. Repetition is the name of the game, whether it’s learning, training, or dare we say it – indoctrination.

        You’ll note, if you read my post, that I don’t claim the LOA is completely invalid – I just point out the many weaknesses in the hypothesis that occur to me. I’m not sure it qualifies as a theory and it most certainly is NOT a law in the scientific sense of the word.

        Contribute to the discussion: Tell me why all my concerns are bogus, and why the LOA is a real “law” in your opinion. Why are my points wrong?

        • Patrick,

          And, once again you insisting (“Tell me why all my concerns are bogus, and why the LOA is a real ‘law’ in your opinion”) that I answer your questions or play by your rules doesn’t make it so, any more than Neale writing a column about a specific topic doesn’t keep you from harping on the same topics: beliefs are bad, and science is all we can trust due to evidentiary proof.

          Words are often misused. Is it really a “war on drugs?” Was Vietnam really a “Police Action?” Is it any wonder, really, that it’s called the LOA? (And I only see one reference to the LOA in Neale’s column, BTW.)

          ~Annie

    • Patrick Gannon

      I’ve seen no defense for the LOA or any comments in opposition to my objections that critically question the concept. so I’ll go ahead and play chess with myself and quote a defense of the LOA that I don’t entirely agree with, but which is well written and compelling. I think it fails to address many of my objections, but I’ll go ahead and debate myself in an effort to look at both sides, and paste this post from Barb McMahon, Director of Communications for the non-profit Pediatric AIDS Canada on the ADaringAdventure website. She is specifically responding to a request to defend the LOA.

      ——————————
      “After careful thought, I’ve had to ask myself, do I actually believe in the Law of Attraction?

      I believe the theory has its merits and in the right hands and the right circumstances it can do some amazing things. Sort of.

      This is as enthusiastic an endorsement as I’ll give to anything. I’d do the same mutter and foot shuffle if you asked how I felt about marriage and I’ve been happily married for 26 years now.

      I think there’s enough to the Law of Attraction that I can’t entirely dismiss it. I’ve had moments of being open to and accepting the good things life has to offer. And in those moments, they really do seem to drop into my lap.

      And we all know the people who walk through life with a permanent cloud over their heads. Every time you talk to them, something awful has happened. Their car’s been stolen, the roof caved in, they’re being wrongfully sued. Crazy bad weird things.

      I can’t help but wonder why is that?

      Does the good or bad stuff just manifest out of nothing, drawn by the power of your thoughts alone? Can 228 passengers attract a plane crash just by worrying about it?

      Um. No. I really don’t think so.

      It’s a big old world out there and on any given day, you are bombarded by things both good and bad. Opportunities and disasters surround you at all times, vying for your attention.

      Human beings have an amazing capacity for ignoring the things that don’t need our immediate attention. The bad smells from fish farm down the road, the power lines running right through the beautiful view. The effort it takes to haul our extra ten pounds of body fat around all day. All of these eventually become part of the background of our lives, no longer noticed because we’ve decided they aren’t important.

      You learn to filter it out, to focus on what matters the most to you. It’s either that or go through life too distracted to do anything.

      And depending on who we are or what we’ve learned in this life, we filter out either the opportunities or the disasters and either believe that life is a great and joyful thing or it’s total crap.

      Neither view is the truth. It’s just our accepted reality.

      Law of Attraction, with its upbeat message of being happy and being abundant, helps you to filter out some of the bad things you’ve been focussing on. And then, “magically” the good stuff appears.

      When you take a close look at your friend with the cloud over his head, you realize that what never gets told in the story of constant disaster, is the fact that he’s got a couple of really great kids, a secure job and parents who have helped him out repeatedly through the years.

      Paying attention to that might not fix his roof, but he’d be a happier person.

      And really, isn’t that what we all want? To be happier? Most of the proponents of Law of Attraction tell you not to worry about the details of how it will happen or what your life will look like when you get to “Happy”. They say to just focus on the feeling of being happy and it will come to you.

      They’re right, of course. It comes to you, not because your circumstances have changed, but because you’ve reordered how you see the things around you. You’ve started to give more weight to the things that make you happy and less to the things that bug you.

      The same thing happens when you go looking for new opportunities. I bump into new, exciting opportunities every damn day. Because I know I’m surrounded by them. I don’t filter them out.

      But I know and you know people who do filter them out. I’ve stood back and watched as Opportunity not only knocked for someone, but actually came up and clobbered them over the head and they didn’t see it for what it was. So they walked away, leaving the two of us, my friend Opportunity and me, shaking our heads.

      These are people desperate for a new chance. They think “All I need is a break.” But they can’t see the breaks for what they are. They come up with all kinds of excuses, reasons why they can’t take the opportunities that are being handed to them. They reject opportunity.

      We’re all looking for a better life. I don’t believe that there’s a magical way to get there. I do believe that a kind of magic happens when you start to see the good stuff that’s all around you, whether you think it just appeared, or if you believe that it’s been there all along.

      Some people can get to where they want to be just by deciding to change their filters. Some by counting their blessings and some by looking at the world through the Law of Attraction.

      I say, on the road to Happy, choose the conveyance that gets you there the fastest.”
      ——————————

      I really liked her response. It doesn’t help support the “Law” aspect of the so-called LOA, but from a practical standpoint, positive thinking, being aware, recognizing what you do have and so forth can contribute to happiness, but I’m not sure that’s really what those people selling books and audio downloads and programs to teach you how to exercise the LOA really have in mind; so to me, it’s not a real defense, but may have other value.

      I can tie this to my (I hear the groans) questioning of beliefs. As Barb points out, it can be helpful to look at what you have instead of just focusing on what you don’t have. That suggests to me that a starting point may be to ask the simple question – “What’s the very worst that it could be?” Accept that, and then look at what you do have. Adopt a positive attitude as she suggests. Attitude makes a difference.

      Extending that just a little bit – ask yourself about God and the afterlife. What’s the very worst that it could be? To me the very worst would be if any of our religions turned out to be true, but I think for many people the very worst thing is that there be nothing at all after death. I suggest that we accept that we don’ t know, and work to avoid conflicting that knowledge of our ignorance with beliefs that tell ourselves otherwise. I suggest that we focus instead on what we have here and now.

  • Neale,

    I have both read Happier Than God, and taken the course at a like-minded website. The fact that the “Law of Attraction” was only the first step in a series made perfect sense to me. How can we appreciate anything we receive without knowing it’s opposite? How can we know that our contextual field has served us long enough that we might let go with gratitude if we don’t know we’ve created it?

    It has been my experience that the universe runs more smoothly with such insights and feelings than without.

    Love, Blessings and Gratitude,
    ~Annie