The other night I was harshly scolded by my Spiritualist pastor who said she read my book and feels that I make a lot of things up and that I expect people to eat it up. She said that she strongly disagrees with a lot of what I wrote. She was also quick to say that metaphysicians (or metaphysicists) have the need to identify themselves with prominent historical figures. I’ve been experiencing this defensive attitude from a number of people in my life concerning my writings. Although I have also received a decent amount of positive feedback from the readers of some article directories like http://www.faithinreligion.com. I’d like to address this intolerance I am seeing, not to defend my beliefs, but because this attitude is rather prevalent in American society and other countries.

The truth is nothing I am saying is original. I want to stress that many other authors have explored these ideas over the past few centuries. I cannot say for certain that everything I say is any more accurate than what other people have to say about life and the afterlife. My information comes from a source that cannot be validated in a way that will satisfy the skeptic. However, this mystical knowledge has been known for thousands of years. I have just been telling the story somewhat differently and giving these theoretical philosophies names. I may as well name them since other psychic investigators are creating all sorts of new universal laws.

It’s a shame that we must aggressively oppose each other people’s ideas because we are so confident that our beliefs alone are correct. If we cannot hold on to our beliefs while at the same time respecting other people’s beliefs, this thing called life cannot work. Yes, it’s true our beliefs are important, but they are not so crucial that we must get angry at the person who has a different perspective. This is sensible even if their ideas sharply conflict with our own personal belief system. This is what happened in the crusades (I realize there was more to it than that). Who cares if another person has an independent view on the origin and expiration of life? Your beliefs are not worth alienating you from your neighbor. We have a burning desire to be right about everything. We do not need to make converts out of those who disagree with us. We should simply allow them to be as they are. I’m told this is the meaning of law of allowing.

There seems to be some psychological principle at work here. It’s as if when people disagree with us, we feel we are being disrespected and invalidated. That boils down to a feeling of being unloved. This is a crazy thought process. At the same time, no one has the right to say your beliefs are incorrect or unimportant. One person’s ideas are as valid as that of the next person. You may be convinced the sun is yellow, and another person might claim it’s orange. Who is right? Are we going to get in a fight over it? What if someone else were to describe the sun in a radically different way? What if the person said that the sun is green? How do we know he or she is wrong? Are our physical senses so reliable that we can say with certainty that what we see is entirely accurate and without error? Do we know that much about the nature of reality that we can be so positive about our assumptions and in what we experience? I don’t think so. Our opinion of the color of the sun should not cause us to have mental breakdowns (which in some cases people do become violent in defending their beliefs). Defining the nature of things is really an intellectual pursuit. After all, the sun does seem to have different colors, including yellow, orange, and red. I’m not sure about green though. To be sure, anything is possible in the unknown universe.

I have been getting a lot of heat lately from people for saying these things. It’s my opinion that people tend to be overly attached to their beliefs. I am the first to admit that I could be totally wrong about my theories. I don’t think so, but it’s possible. It’s possible that we are all wrong. We won’t know until we cross over. At the same time, we could ALL be at least partially right about our beliefs. The Master Plan as it is commonly called is immense; perhaps people of all faiths are correct to some degree. Chances are the beliefs that we are fighting about will be meaningless on the other side. Unfortunately the people I have talked to do not want to hear this. I can only say that this situation isn’t the all or nothing affair that some of us are making it out to be. I am certain that we all (at least most of us) have the same core beliefs about life and life thereafter. It’s the little things that are separating us and creating a chasm.

I am trying to get my point across in a way that won’t offend people who feel so strongly about their beliefs. I am finding it difficult. This concerns me. I can’t understand why people with different viewpoints cannot find common ground. I admit I often have trouble with it too. I too would like people to see my point of view. But then I try to keep my mouth shut and let the other person speak for a while. It gives the other person a chance to make their feelings known, which is essential for building repoire and trust. This results in lasting relationships.

If people believe it’s so necessary to argue about who is right rather than coexist, and work together for the betterment of humanity, then maybe I should have written about something more palatable. I am not trying to pass judgment on others about this issue either. This article is meant to stimulate people’s thinking about how they see the world, themselves and others. Thank you for your giving me the opportunity to discuss this topic.

Regardless of whether or not you agree or disagree with some of what is said in this article, your comments are very much encouraged and appreciated. Thank you.

David Almeida is a Spiritualist and researcher of Rosicrucian philosophy and esoteric knowledge. David is a past article contributor to the Sedona Journal of Emergence and other New Age magazines. He has also earned the title of Board Certified Hypnotist and Reiki healer. David is the author of The First Truth: A Book of Metaphysical Theories and Illusion of the Body: Introducing the Body Alive Principle. Both books can be purchased at http://Amazon.com. Visit http://www.bodyaliveprinciple.com

David Almeida is a Spiritualist and researcher of Rosicrucian philosophy and esoteric knowledge. David is a past article contributor to the Sedona Journal of Emergence and other New Age magazines. He has also earned the title of Board Certified Hypnotist and Reiki healer. David is the author of The First Truth: A Book of Metaphysical Theories and Illusion of the Body: Introducing the Body Alive Principle. Both books can be purchased at http://Amazon.com. Visit http://www.bodyaliveprinciple.com

Author Bio: David Almeida is a Spiritualist and researcher of Rosicrucian philosophy and esoteric knowledge. David is a past article contributor to the Sedona Journal of Emergence and other New Age magazines. He has also earned the title of Board Certified Hypnotist and Reiki healer. David is the author of The First Truth: A Book of Metaphysical Theories and Illusion of the Body: Introducing the Body Alive Principle. Both books can be purchased at http://Amazon.com. Visit http://www.bodyaliveprinciple.com

Category: Religion
Keywords: different cultural beliefs, different belief systems, different beliefs in god, personal differences