Epiphany {new age/spirituality}

Conversations With God

March 10, 2006

Conversations with God (Books 1, 2 and 3) by Neale Donald Walsch

Ever wanted to ask God all the questions that have been troubling you about life and death?

Now is your chance….

Thought-provoking and amusing read at times particularly when God is telling jokes which the author doesn’t expect. But isn’t that how God should be portrayed? There is the common question, “When I talk to God and ask him a question, he never answers? Why doesn’t he show himself or speak etc?” And the truth is he speaks all the time via human thoughts. Ideas are placed in the mind of the director of an inspiring film, or in the author of a book etc.

There are certain illusions dispelled such as how men and women are designed to connect and certain things would not exist if we were not supposed to indulge ie: sexual pleasure etc. It is deemed as controversial and blasphemous by Christian fundamentalists but I think it is thought-provoking, inspiring and closer to the truth.

In my humble opinion, it encourages a looser, more open-minded way of thinking, as the questions asked are often answered in a “yes and no” fashion. For example how God is often refered to as a seperate entity but can also be an energy / lifesource ie: the soul / essence of each and every human being. – Jen

“How do you deal with wanting to believe in God, but finding the classic ‘interpretations’ of what or who God is simply too unbelievable to be anything more than fairytale facade? ‘Conversations With God’ quite literally changed my life. It suggests a God that is and is not anything or anyone. It is a God that I believe in, a God that makes logical sense to me. A God based on Love and not fear or punishment. God does not judge. It, he or she also has a sense of humour – it’s obvious – it, he or she created humour! Read on, I merely scratch the surface.” – a friend….

Amazon.co.uk Review

“Conversations with God started when the author in the midst of a frustrating low-point in his life wrote a letter to God and was replied to. The book takes the format of the author questioning and God answering him. The theme that runs continually through the book is to remember our divine origins. Walsch’s book makes God accessible in an almost secular way, different to our Bible-based one. An immediate, humorous, “guy next door kinda God” reminding us of basic truths. The book is written for Westerners and is practical and daily-life oriented, with answers on sexuality, money, relationships and health amongst many others. Conversations with God has the potential to reprogramme you to see the divine and spirituality in a totally new light.

The question to be asked is “is this really God?” and indeed Walsch asks it and is replied: “What difference does it make? Even if everything I’ve said is ‘wrong’, can you think of a better way to live?” “No” replies Walsch and if you are searching for spiritual answers and have not found your traditional distant God helpful, then this book could be for you.” –Peter Lloyd

Only registered users can comment.

  1. “The book has certainly had a big following and has shaken traditional Christians by wrenching the access rights to God from their jealous grasp. But what it may not have done is liberated its readers from their dependence on an authoritative Book as their source of inspiration. Witness the production of volumes 2 and 3, plus “Conversations with God for teenagers” (in my possession, since I took it from one of my teenage children) and all the other sequels.

    By becoming hooked on the books and the notion of Walsch as guru, we miss the main message which is that we can, just as Walsch did, find the wisdom within ourselves. Or am I missing something here? I do not begrudge those who are content to have a surrogate conversation with God via the modern-day prophet Neale, whose authorial output is endless.

    But why not cut out the middleman? Does Walsch or his God teach this?”

    Ian Mulder
    http://www.ianmulder.clara.net

  2. “find the wisdom within ourselves. Or am I missing something here?”

    Not at all IMO. I think the use of the word “God” is to encourage those who are rigid in their christian beliefs to read the book in the 1st place. Then they are either repulsed or become more open-minded. And composed in a conversation, “I said” and “God said” makes it easier to understand perhaps. Like many new age / spiritual books, it just reaffirms aspects of life and death that I already knew deep down and that I should trust my instincts. Although, I do quote from it regularly, I never treat any book as a matter-of-fact bible, I just take or leave whatever resonates. And then read something else that also inspires me. If people do support the notion of Walsch as guru they are ineffect forming a new religion and as God describes “religion is the root of all evil.”

  3. “Walsch rescues God from the Christians and that is one way to do it. A more radical way is to free oneself from the notion that the God up there is good.

    I discovered the wonderful word theodicy the other day. It means rescuing God from the accusation that he is the one who causes the evil or as the dictionary says,

    theodicy: a vindication of God’s goodness and justice in the face of the existence of evil.

    “But I rather like the idea of accepting the common notion of God and then blaming him for making us the way we are, together with all the other things that make this world a “vale of tears”. We are the innocent victims of God’s bungling, I think. I had an entertaining discussion with a Christian ecademy member about homosexuality, on the lines of “if it is bad, why did God make it possible? Who’s to blame here?”

    Other people avoid the absurdities of the theism we have inherited by saying that God is inside us. Walsch is one of those. But it seems to me it’s a way to avoid a big overdue confrontation with the anomalies of Christianity.”

    Ian Mulder
    http://www.ianmulder.clara.net

  4. I have come to the conclusion that God is not a scriptwriter and isn’t interested in the detail. Any intelligence that was focussed on the detail would be forced by compassion to prevent bad things happening to good people. Since there is obviously no divine justice we are left to assume that God plays another role, not the close concern or caring for that we tend to assume.

    I’ve been wondering about what kind of “intelligence” God is and I strongly suspect that the attribution of conscious intent is a fallacy or projection on our part. God may just be dreaming an increadibly abstract dream in which the detail of the lives passing by hold very little interest for God.

  5. I read the first comment above and thought, “Wow, those are my thoughts exactly!” Then I reached the bottom and read the author’s name. Yes, those are my thoughts exactly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.