[What follows is an emotional response, not a reasoned argument, but I stand by it just the same.]

When I was at the Food not Bombs serving today, a couple approached us to compliment us for what we were doing. So we were talking to them. I was talking with Maggie in particular, and she very quickly led the conversation to the topic of religion, inquiring about whether I was Christian. Before I realized her intentions, I responded by saying that I was seeking and wasn't sure about anything anymore but that I had been Catholic since the cradle- up until pretty recently. She asked what I meant by seeking. It's a hard concept to describe to someone who has such a firm grasp on the truth already. I started out going from the opposite direction- that I'm not an atheist, that the closest word for my faith in a god is pantheism, which I described for her by relating it to the Christian concept of God being both immanent and transcendant, and pantheism being pretty much solely the immanent part. God is in everything and is everything. God is what causes movement, God is what moves. God is life. That, of course, was not what she wanted to hear. She was very glad that I was seeking (I must guess that she assumes I am bound to eventually find Jesus again by this method. At least I'm not stationary in my lack of acceptance of the saving word of Christ...). So she went on to deliver a very passionate apologetic session. It was very interesting to actually be on the other side, to have been where she was and to now have it delivered back to me as if I wasn't aware of everything she was saying. Apparently, the key to all my spiritual troubles in the past is that I didn't read the bible enough. Apparently, if I read John and Acts, I will find the truth that I must be searching for by the fact that I'm human.

Two things stuck out that were not in the least persuasive to me. She claimed to know or have access to the Truth because of her personal relationship with God (or something to that effect) and that all the variations of religious sects within Christianity can't all be right or all have the Truth. I tried to show her how there are a lot of different people with differing (if only slightly) beliefs who believe they have the Truth and that other people should adopt their version to have the actual truth. There is nothing to say that one version of the truth in this situation is truer than another. Her response seems circular and did not touch on answering my question at all- something about her knowing that this is the truth because of her personal relationship with God. The other thing she said, which is a fundamental feature of christian faith, is that Jesus came to save us from our sins so that we are able to join God in heaven in his perfection. When I questioned the eternal nature of our souls, she again gave a circular and vague answer about being able to "just know" by such evidence as the fact that we can reason, because "animals are great, but we're clearly not like them."

Socrates (or Plato, or through Plato...) argued that death should not be feared because either death is an end or a change. If death is an end, then it is good (basically because you don't have to suffer anything else anymore), and if death is a change, then it is good (supposedly because that means he can philosophize with all the great philosophers that have died before him for eternity). I am at a point spiritually where I am (or at least I think I am) okay with the idea that death is an end, for my particular consciousness at least. It is never really an end because I will pass on the fire of life to other living things to come after me, just as other living things are passing on their lives to me that I may live (this is food we're talking about). I don't feel that I need to be saved from this world. This world is where I find all of my meaning; it is the only real thing to me, and I want to immerse myself in it deeper and deeper, not be wisked away from it by a savior. You may say that death as an end will do the same thing, but all life is interconnected, and my life will go on long after the "my" part falls away, because that is just an illusion. Whoa, that sounds very buddhist to me, partially. I better watch out- nirvana is just another interpretation of salvation and heaven.

She was a very nice respectful lady, just a little pushy with her own beliefs (because, of course, her way is the one right way...). Of course, I write all this realizing that earlier tonight I had a sort of evangelical session of my own, talking with my friend Justin about my own spiritual journey and my current thoughts about civilization. The difference is in that situation was that Justin came to me with questions, wanting to have a dialogue, and we did. Justin was respectful about the thoughts I was expressing even when he differed in what he believes, and my intent was not to convert him but simply explain myself. Well, perhaps my intent cannot be free of all such malicious intent, but when he stated that he flat out thought differently in some area, I was at least willing to accept that and accept him. The lady this afternoon tried to set me up on a path to become exactly like her (I'm supposed to read John and Acts (they're right next door, you know) and then journal my prayers to God, and then eventually I'll notice God speaking to me through those journals and recognize that God is working in my life. My rhetorical question- how is that different from me talking to a tree?). She said that she was going to be around there (hobo park) on fridays in the future (I guess to make sure the homeless people are all christian too), so I guess she'll be expecting to see progress in the future. You know what- fuck progress. Progress says that now isn't good enough, that I need to work for some future goal when all will be well. The problem is, the future is always the future, and the present moment is always now, and every moment is what actually matters- being present to experience and live every moment. Progress is the great myth of civilization- we must keep moving forward to find meaning, even though the goal keeps receeding before us. What is good and what is the goal must be what is. What is beautiful is what is. What is sacred is what is. The world is "simultaneously sacred and profane, but above all, alive." And that's my fucking religion.