by Gary T. McDonald, author of The Gospel of Thomas (the Younger)

I was recently surprised when I was corrected in an online forum by a fellow ex-vangelical who felt my use of “God” might trigger anguish in other readers there. I asked her if it was the word itself or just the conceptualization of God one finds in Fundamentalist, Evangelical or even plain-Jane Christian circles? I went on to ask if one conceptualized God as non-Biblical — an impersonal, non-being with no personality, no more than all the known and unknown laws of science, all the truths, the software that allows the universe (or multi-verse) to be and maintain itself — if that would cause trouble among fellow readers? She responded that if that was my conceptualization, why not just call it “the universe” instead of “God”? Good question.

The Gospel of John opens with an allusion to the opening of the Torah, but then says something radical. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” I’m not quoting scripture here because I believe it’s infallibly true or anything close. I just find it interesting that this weird statement is actually in the Bible at all and in pole position in one of the gospels. It seems to be conceptualizing God by equating and identifying God with Logos — the Greek word from which “Word” is translated. (The gospels, of course, were written in Greek.) Some scholars believe that this verse was added by someone other than the original author. Maybe, maybe not. But we can say for certain the use of “Logos” raises interesting questions.

Most Christians will tell you that Logos here means the whole Christian theology: God created the world so that at a certain moment he could send his son to die to redeem all who believe everything in this sentence. Logos for them is God’s Word, his actions, his promise.

The problem is that “Logos” already had a well established meaning in Greek culture that went back five hundred years before the gospel was written. Logos meant Divine Order. Eternal Order. Truth. What is reasonable as opposed to unreasonable. Sure, the church fathers want to hijack this tradition and make it say something else, but should we let them keep getting away with it? Especially now in a time when the claims of Christianity are facing the heavy scrutiny they’ve deserved all along?

I think Logos is a pretty good label for the conceptualization I asked my fellow ex-vangelical about — an impersonal, non-being with no personality, no more than the all the known and unknown laws of science, all the truths, the software that allows the universe (or multi-verse) to be and maintain itself. And our relationship to that.

Okay, but what good is that? Why might we need this conceptualization? Or why not just say “the universe” and leave it at that?

I admit that throwing around “Logos” today sounds a bit silly. Like something out of Monty Python or bad sci-fi. And that, to me, is why redefining the word “God” might be important.

In further discussion with my fellow ex-vangelical, I mentioned that sometimes using the word “God” opens something in me in a way that “universe” or “Logos”, for that matter, doesn’t. Even though I’m no longer a Christian or even a believer in a personal God-being, the word still resonates with me at some very deep level. Maybe it’s the so-called God Gene or my own deep-brain programming from birth, but whatever it is, despite all my rage at my force-fed Christian upbringing, there is something there. And that may be true for other ex-vanglicals, even if their rage won’t allow them to acknowledge it.

I’m a Buddhist now. In my investigation of that tradition I’ve studied Indian traditions that long pre-date the Abrahamic religions and incorporate just about every imaginable spiritual path. These are various strains or schools or practices that have competed and complemented each other as vehicles for the emotional well-being of the Indian population over a vast history. Some are called Yogas. Yoga simply means yoke — something you submit yourself to in order to pull the wagon of your best life forward. Some of the oldest yogas are Jnana, Bahkti, Karma, Laya and Hatha. The first two seems relevant here.

Jnana is the path of self-realization through knowledge and wisdom. It’s all about understanding what is good and true. And not just understanding on the intellectual level, but understanding at the very core of one’s being. For me, it’s the Logos path. Learning what is true both on the surface of life and at its deepest levels and living aligned with that.

But there’s also Bahkti which is loving devotion to a god. It doesn’t matter much which because the god is less relevant than the devotion. It, like Jnana, is a path toward inner peace, but using other tools, other parts of yourself. Allowing the goodness of an imagined god to permeate you so that you become more loving, generous and finally, happy.

I’m not a Bahkti person, really. I spent too many years trying to free myself from the grip of all the unhealthy aspects of the Christianity I was raised with. I’m much more a Jnana person. But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t little bits of me that respond to the right Bahkti stimulus. That in certain moments I can’t open to a Bahkti experience. It happens.

Even if we occasionally, like Einstein, just use the word “God” for Logos, that doesn’t mean the word can only have intellectual freight. It can also have some positive emotional associations that can help open the doors to inner peace and happiness, if we let it. Atheists shouldn’t deny ourselves the consolation of prayer on principle if it sometimes gives us a greater sense of unity with the universe.

I’ve written a novel about a man who was a nephew of Jesus who knew him as a sort of Jnana teacher, much like the Buddha, but with a dash of Bahkti. After Jesus’ death, Thomas (the Younger) lives through the rest of the First Century watching as the developing Christian cult moves ever further away from Jesus’ teachings until there is little resemblance at all. Learn more about The Gospel of Thomas (the Younger) here — www.garytmcdonald

“A convincing faux gospel that challenges orthodoxy. Thomas traverses his world encountering First Century figures from Jesus to Nero bringing his times and the origins of Christianity alive in a fresh, new way with wry humor and exciting storytelling.”

―Winston Groom, author of Forrest Gump

“Gary T. McDonald is a born storyteller, and his research is impeccable. The book is fascinating from beginning to end, and his long-overdue, iconoclastic portrait of the Apostle Paul made me stand up and cheer.”

―Lewis Shiner, author of Glimpses

“An inherently fascinating and deftly crafted work of truly memorable fiction,The Gospel Of Thomas (the Younger) is an extraordinary novel by an extraordinary writer and unreservedly recommended…”

― Midwest Book Review