May. 15th, 2004 05:45 pm
Philosophical question
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
textualdevianceAt the risk of setting a can opener on Cream of Worm Soup, there's something I've been curious about.
I know a lot of people on my flist here are religious, in various denominations. Not being actively into organized religion myself (though I was raised Christian) I'm curious about how liberal people of faith feel about that.
I understand that it's certainly not necessary to be conservative or reactionary in order to be religious, but I can't escape the fact that there are certain tenets, particularly in some denominations, which are pretty clear about things like the status of women and same-sex activity, etc. and I wonder how people reconcile that?
I know for some people I've talked to, they simply consider themselves Christian in its strictest sense-- following the teachings of Jesus. I can perfectly understand that. I believe Jesus existed, and I think he was a cool guy who had a lot of nice things to say. I don't believe he was the son of God, because I don't believe in a conscious deity, but I think he was generally pretty groovy. It's all the other stuff in the Bible that seems kind of extraneous to me, especially the teachings of Paul, and much of the old testament, and Genesis, etc. and I've wondered how people who believe in the rest of the Bible deal with some of the ickier stuff that's in there. In particular, I've wondered about people who belong to religions which, as an organization, are particularly conservative. To me, it's kind of like having a job, and then finding out your CEO donates to the KKK or something. I'd want out of that job, fast. I wouldn't want to be part of an organization whose leadership actively engages in things I seriously disagree with. Is it a matter of not having other alternatives (like not having another job to go to, for instance)? Or is it more of a desire to try to change the organization from within?
Related, I also wonder how people of faith deal with ecumenical issues. Most religions have some element of one-true-wayism in them, so I've often wondered how different denominations really feel about other faiths. Do they feel that the other people are just misguided, and will find the true way eventually? Or is it something more like accepting something like... God has multiple facets, and therefore any/all religions can be/are right at the same time?
My apologies if any of this comes off as asking someone to justify their beliefs. I'm just curious, really.
I know a lot of people on my flist here are religious, in various denominations. Not being actively into organized religion myself (though I was raised Christian) I'm curious about how liberal people of faith feel about that.
I understand that it's certainly not necessary to be conservative or reactionary in order to be religious, but I can't escape the fact that there are certain tenets, particularly in some denominations, which are pretty clear about things like the status of women and same-sex activity, etc. and I wonder how people reconcile that?
I know for some people I've talked to, they simply consider themselves Christian in its strictest sense-- following the teachings of Jesus. I can perfectly understand that. I believe Jesus existed, and I think he was a cool guy who had a lot of nice things to say. I don't believe he was the son of God, because I don't believe in a conscious deity, but I think he was generally pretty groovy. It's all the other stuff in the Bible that seems kind of extraneous to me, especially the teachings of Paul, and much of the old testament, and Genesis, etc. and I've wondered how people who believe in the rest of the Bible deal with some of the ickier stuff that's in there. In particular, I've wondered about people who belong to religions which, as an organization, are particularly conservative. To me, it's kind of like having a job, and then finding out your CEO donates to the KKK or something. I'd want out of that job, fast. I wouldn't want to be part of an organization whose leadership actively engages in things I seriously disagree with. Is it a matter of not having other alternatives (like not having another job to go to, for instance)? Or is it more of a desire to try to change the organization from within?
Related, I also wonder how people of faith deal with ecumenical issues. Most religions have some element of one-true-wayism in them, so I've often wondered how different denominations really feel about other faiths. Do they feel that the other people are just misguided, and will find the true way eventually? Or is it something more like accepting something like... God has multiple facets, and therefore any/all religions can be/are right at the same time?
My apologies if any of this comes off as asking someone to justify their beliefs. I'm just curious, really.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
My religious background: raised a Lutheran, sent to a private Catholic school, Lutheran, Catholic, Southern Baptist and Jehovah's Witness in the immediate family. From that launch pad I studied many different paths including Witchcraft, Paganism, Buddhism, Theosophy, Edgar Cayce, Torkom Saraydarian and beyond. I settled on Science of Being.
My point of view: religion was created by man to control man. Remember, the shortest and most direct path between two points (such as God and 'man') is a straight line. No intermediaries. Most religions create a huge curve that delays people's Spiritual growth, most times intentionally. Plus many people do not want to think for themselves, or accept responsibility for their life. It is easier to turn to an organizied religion that makes the rules and then follow most of them, blindly. Certainly there are altruistic aspects to many religions with the aim being to help man know God. However, as FoxyKC pointed out, when one has spent a good deal of time studying the "backstory" of religion one gains a very different view of things.
Let me digress for a moment. It makes sense, from the standpoint of religion being made by man to control man, that most would not look kindly on homosexuality. Why? Because those unions did not produce children which would grow up tithing to the church. (Don't go jumping on me for over-simplifying this, there is only so much room on LJ) We can look at it from another angle. If God is omniscient, omnipotent and perfect and 'man' is created in his image ... then are not all homosexuals, bisexuals et al of God? It's not like they are a subhuman race or anything.
The problem (once again we are still dealing with my opinion here) is that most religions and people humanize God. They give him a personality with all kinds of preferences and whims. Think about it - God listens to all the prayers from all the various 'true' religions and acts on them? (That would be chaos) Why would an omniscient, omnipotent, perfect Being do the bidding of self-avowed imperfect beings? It's the cosmic version of 'Let's make a Deal'. Very illogical.
*getting off the soapbox* *grin*