Some thougts on religion while visiting China.

I am in Beijing this week on business and I took the opportunity today to visit the Lama Temple. It is a remarkable place some five centuries old. It's a bit touristy, but people still come to chant, pray, and make offerings to the Buddha. What struck me about the worship was the ritual--something that is passed on from one generation to the next so that the worship is performed correctly. Of course, all brands of faith depend on ritual as part of the process of building community.

It should come as no shock to anyone on this board who has read my posts that I am generally openly hostile to organized religion. But what I observed today was oddly comforting. It seems when you really get right down to it we are all wired pretty much the same--and we want answers. I suppose the sticky wicket for me is the source of those answers, and the methods employed to arrive at them.

For my part, I don't believe we have any answers--just lots of questions. And of course, my cynicism returned in spades after I passed the fifth gift shop on the way to the exits.

 

finally a solid point.

each are seeking!


and my claim is, that in every branch of belief each claimed (wrote about) the day when truth will come. It is that ultimate hope of every belief sect on the globe, that ONE day, the 'truth' will unveil itself.

Some claim a 'messiah' some claim a lama, a buddha, a quetzacoatl, a pahanna, a kalki, a prick in white......... but all claim one day some idiot will walk with 'the truth'.........

funny part is, i claim the truth is 'stupid easy' and 'the name to know' is not all that far fetched.

so what is the universal language?

what is it that enables mankind to create?

what frame of undertanding can be described in that universal language that could possibly enable mankind universally to understand 'itself'?

ie.... mankind created words, correct? mankind uses words, language and of course math to articulate, correct?

does knowledge evolve over time?

what would that pinnacle be? Could it be to understand 'itself'?

If existence only operates ONE way, is the math 'the name' to know?

 

In my view, those who claim to know "the truth" are either very gullible or very dangerous--perhaps both.

 

First of all--I'm jealous you are visiting China!

I believe this is so. The atheist would say it is a product of evolution. I believe it may be that, but it is also the way God draws us toward knowledge of Him.

Yeah--commercialization sucks and takes something away from sincere devotion. You have to remember, though, that people make up the group who profess a religion, but the religion is not simply the people.

 

Fair enough. But I think innate in the human animal is the desire to understand its surroundings. Given our powers of imagination, it is easy to see how religious belief can start from nothing and grow to millions hungry for "answers."

Well, to be fair, the monks probably don't have any other means of income. But the number of gift shops there is crazy!

 

Strictly from an evolutionary stance, why do suppose imagination developed? What purpose does it serve if it leaves the organism "hungry?"

 

Sounds like China has taken consumerism to the brainwash level (i.e. Tom Tuttle from Tacoma, you will be brainwashed). Did you finally buy something?

 

That is an excellent question. I do not have an answer.

 

Heh heh. No, I didn't buy anything. But I have an irresistible urge to go back and empty my wallet!

 

Neither do I!

 

Be good to the monks!

 

And that is really where the fun begins, isn't it?

 

And another "f" word...





























...I was talking about "F"aith, you dirty birdie!

 

I did put a few RMB in the donation box.

 

Answers we get by testing reality, not by adopting baseless beliefs.

You observed yourself that ritual is passed from generation to generation. This can never be a method of questioning. Hence, it is neither a search for answers nor a desire to get answers. If there was a search for answers then questions would have to be asked before answers could be given. But they're not. The "answers" produce the questions, not the other way around.

Instead, it is merely a need of identity. Of "building community" as you put it. This requires no questions, only acceptance.

 

interesting


i like the wisdom

 

I think the questions stand on their own. Why are we here? How did we get here? What is the purpose of life? What causes thunder in the sky, etc.. These are all questions man has been asking since we lost our tails and walked upright. My guess is we will never have the answers, but the quest will continue until our own sun finally explodes and obliterates all life as our relatives thousands of generations hence will know it. Of course by then, perhaps they will have the technology to stop such a calamity--or to escape to another fecund sphere capable of supporting human life. Heck, maybe that's how this one got populated--just speculating, of course.

 

I don't believe the otherwise common perception that a need for answers result in supernatural ideas. The first and foremost reason is that the supernatural has no explanatory power and therefore is useless as an answer. Answering a question with something supernatural is the same as not asking the question at all.

A second reason is that we continue to attribute things to the supernatural in spite of perfectly good knowledge that gives us ample opportunity to explain things properly.

For example, knowledge of most disorders and diseases is readily available, and yet some still attribute these to their gods. Despite available knowledge of how floods come about, some insist on attributing floods that have never even occurred to their gods. Solid knowledge of biodiversity has existed for centuries and yet some choose to deliberately discard it in favor of myth with no explanatory powers whatsoever.

This all points to the fact that the supernatural is not a method of answering questions but a method to deal with the nature of our own awareness and sensibility.

 

This is the sort of response that is offered by one of three types of people.

1. Those who have no faith identity and have never attempted one (thus the opinion is out of ignorance).

2. Those who had a faith identity and were either burned by bad people or were too immature to experience their faith identity in toto (thus the opinion is out of ignorance or emotional hurt).

or

3. Narcissists who think that their opinion is fact (thus the opinion is out of ignorance, emotional immaturity, and hubris).

 

In today's world, certainly. But back before man understood things like heat and friction, Zeus throwing lightning bolts around was a perfectly plausible explanation for the phenomena. Likewise, it was reasonable to believe the Sun revolved around the Earth--an Earth which was flat, consequently.

I don't disagree. However, even the scientific method is flawed in its ability to deliver "truth." What it does is insure repeatable results which, when observed with controls, can provide the best possible explanation for certain phenomena. For example, I don't think anyone--even the devoutly religious--doubt that lightning is caused by atmospheric friction caused by colliding fronts. But we could find out tomorrow that lightning is caused by something completely different. Pluto was once a planet, but it now no longer one--yet only 25 years ago if you'd suggested so, you'd have been bounced from the academy. Then we have to tackle the big questions--the origins of life, the purpose of life, etc.. Even our best science is making only an educated guess on these topics. Of course, this acknowledges that the guess is at least educated and not simply a matter of faith which is--if the dictionary is correct anyway--the antithesis of reason.

Yes, AIDS is God's punishment for homosexuality, right?

Agree on all points.

It is speculation, to be sure.

 

I don't know what dictionary you're using (faith and reason are not in opposition--they are different, but not mutually exclusive), but the rest of that is very insightful.

 

Zeus was never an explanation of any natural phenomenon. It simply did not explain thunder to say that Zeus caused it. Thunder was a convient tool to attribute to Zeus, especially since thunder was not fully understood when Greek mythology reigned.

I can see that the difference may be subtle to people who've been raised with the notion that the supernatural is an answer while we sortof wait for a real answer, but there are actually two completely different aspects of the human mind in play here.


By the way, it is still reasonable to say that the sun revolves around the Earth; seen from anywhere on Earth, it does circle the observer. Since this has no religious connotation, though, it is just a side remark

When religious people (here first and foremost meaning of the Abrahamic religions) came to reconcile biological evolution with their religious tenets, did it mean that the tenets of divine creation became obsolete? Of course not. The origin of life will not replace those tenets, either. Divine creation is simply not an explanation of how we got here. And it never was.

Dominion of all, including that of origins, is a requirement for establishment of transcendent qualities of gods. It has very different applications than to serve as explanation of natural phenomena.

And I don't agree with the dictionary per se. Faith only becomes the antithesis of reason when it's applied to areas that employ other methodologies.

 

i think that post speaks for itself.


my point, even the people that speak so sweet and nice will show what a bigots they are by what they do/represent

ie...... one minute so nice and easy going, then turn like a rabid dog simply because when exposed to the 'truth' they react almost violently. (kind of like the vampire when sunlight hits them (of the movies))

 

Being sweet does not mean that one should have to accept disparaging comments. See Matthew 7

And puh-leez...if that is verbal "violence"--you're a tad over-sensitive.

 

false witness is violence to existence (god) and all of mankind


No one has the right to break THE universal command of misleading (lying) from truth!

You witnessed against another based on your own ignorance and that is the FACT of the matter.