 |
A Concept On Religion [Just ONE Concept] (First Draft)
Religion: The Lost Concepts, And The New Ways Along With Whether Or Not There Is A Science--
This Essay breaks 14 pages. So you really only have 13 pages to read if you wish to read this work. Remember it is not meant to offend, only point out. Part II is in the process of being written, so if you like it you will get your sequel.
Enjoy.
Religion: The Lost Concepts, And The New Ways-Along With Whether Or Not There Is A Science To Go With Religion.
Part I
James R.A.W.
Acknowledgment
Let me first start by saying, that this paper is only a philosophical stand point, and is not meant to sound like a biased/opinionated stand point. I do not aim for it to be so much opinionated or biased as I just want to point out the flaws in religion AND science. I want to point out how religion is not this supreme divine way of life that it is supposed to be. I want to point out that religion and science do in some ways, connect with each other. I want to open my mind and search for new concepts while researching the old concepts. I want to further more open your mind up to some of these concepts, and if I fail in that attempt, well I hope that you at least enjoyed reading my work. And I would like to end this by saying that If I offend you in any way, shape, or form, I greatly apologize from the bottom of my heart.
Ever since the beginning of time, the human race has always found lenient ways around things. Why? Greed, laziness, fear, or maybe it's a little bit of them all. The question of why we always look for the easy ways around our problems or tasks a head of us may never be answered. So instead, let's look at the facts, and theories of great and not so great people alike to form what we can maybe call an explanation.
Today, religion is a part of every day life, but not as much as it was lets say in the 1600's and beyond. Today, religion is a choice and a personal concept to believe that there is a higher power and a heaven and hell compared to whether you are to be cremated and your soul to be set free into further: the next life, or reincarnation into a wild animal, strong and virtuous such as that of a wolf or a falcon, so on and so forth. Compared again to when religion was law, where if you were not a devote Christian, or whatever religion you were conceived in to, you were going to hell. You were at the bottom of the humanitarian realm and you did not deserve to exist. Some places worse than others in that you were executed for not following the strict ways of religion.
Religion in it's self is a hypocritical term, but only (and sometimes more) as hypercritical as the people who preach it. Every religion has at some point had it's quirks in that they at some point or another went against their laws, and beliefs to further punish someone. Such as Christianity, said that if you read the bible, go to church, and pray to god and Jesus, that you will be saved from your sins (hypocritical preaching). And yet, that is not the foundation of Christianity, as well as, it is then hypocritically and boldly stated that if you do not go to church, and pray, and read the bible every day, that you will go to hell (hypocritical preaching). To judge wrongly is a sin. Who is a Christian compared to a Jew, or an Atheist to say that if you don't go to church you are doomed to the firey depths of Hell? Christianity is for most, the most dangerous religion. Christianity along with any religion is a hazard, however, Christianity as a religion, and its infamous higher religious figures have managed to cause wars and wreak meaningless havoc. Meaningless in that to shed blood in search of the Holy Grail, the cup that Jesus supposedly drank out of at the last supper. Now, the Holy Grail is a very religious relic, a symbol, with Jesus a religious icon. But to shed blood? To kill another person, after a relic, after Jesus supposedly died for our sins. It's again, hypocritical, as well as taken for granted.
All religions take for granted their own laws. And again, I shall use Christianity, in that, Jesus died for us to thrive, live, and be set free from our sins. That knowledge and "gift" is taken for granted when we tell ourselves "we can commit that crime because in the end Jesus died for us". Now whether that thought flows through a persons mind before committing a crime, or a Sin against nature and god, or not, is beside the point. Most religious people take for granted what they take in, and teach to the next generations. The majority if not all of religion is or has been corrupt, and changed. There is no perfect religion.
Hebrew Scriptures even contradict and at a low distinct level of defilement of the divine word, nature and image of God. "You must not follow other gods, gods of nations that are around you; if you do, the Lord your God who is in your midst will be angry with you, and he will sweep you away off the face of the earth, for the Lord your God is a jealous god.-Deuteronomy 6:14-15" (pg. 235). In saying that God is such a thing is appalling compared to the, virtuous, the divine, the holy, our God is something as atrocious as jealous. Jealousy as we all know corrupts our consciousness, invades our truly just morals turning them into black. "When the Lord your God delivers them into your power and you defeat them, you must put them to death."(pg. 236). Which conflicts with not only the fact that God is just, divine, and loving of all of his children, man kind. But it conflicts with Christian views. In being said that God sacrificed his only son to save all of mankind from their sins as to have a place in his realm, heaven. Then why, would he have his children, the Human race destroy one another. God in all of his magnificence would surely by no means order death upon a person. Punishment maybe, but surely not death, at least that is how he is portrayed. And although Christian Views and Hebrew Scriptures have their differences, they relate in that God is shown to be a heartless God, a god of vengeance and cruelty, or Gods true nature is shown. With that said is when you have conflicting emotions, thoughts, idea's, ideals, and you have the beginning of religious wars, which still go on today after hundreds of years. What is the point in arguing over different beliefs of religion when you worship the same God (the underlying truth)? It further defiles your religion. In saying that your god is just, divine, all powerful, and forgiving, and then starting war because someone doesn't follow the same beliefs is defilement of not only God, but the human race and the once shining spirits are now doomed to live in the Hell they created.
Religion's for the most part, have a higher power whom they accept as God, and they have another figure, a religious icon, the son of god, whom is a lot like Jesus. Different names, and some altered concepts that are very closely related to the rest of religions. It was only in Greek, and Roman, and Egyptian mythologies that you worshiped multiple gods. As time went on you worshiped one god, and you had a hero.
The Bible it's self has been re-written, re-interpreted, or "edited" well over fifty times, how are we to tell whether or not the information in the New Bible is relevant to what was written in the very first? Hundreds of years have passed since Jesus lived and died, who are we to say that Jesus even existed? A bold question, but a bold truth, and we will refer to Psychology for some, hypothetical answers. Psychology? Yes. The development of a child can be symbolized in a fashion representing the growth of a nation.
When a young child is born, they have an overwhelming need to grasp on to things, most importantly their mother. Without the mother the child is doomed, and later down the path of adulthood the child will need a masculine role model, a father, whether the child is male or female, the need to grasp on to a higher authority is vitally important. In an infants eyes, the beholder, the mother, is in a sense the higher power that we symbolize as God. In all founding nations the need to grasp on to a higher meaning, or understanding of life will push towards a religion. The religion may start in a very simple manner, idolizing a dominant role model, such as a king, or a great warrior.
Creating Cosmogony in the Bedford Anthology of World Literature is a good reference book in to further understanding and proving my points through out this piece, "So, like the sun at the center of the heavens, the king and later the pharaoh was the centerpiece of the realm, usually depicted as the representative of the gods, the foundation of cities and the symbol of the city's health. In Ancient Egypt and later in ..:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com surprised ffice:smarttags" />Rome, the king or pharaoh actually became a god"(page 222). In today's society we don't see political figures later becoming a god, or worshiping them, or anything to that effect. However, the medias of today could be considered a symbol of sorts that create the worship of a political figure. We won't go in to great detail on that concept, but it's something to point out.
"By what inner change did immemorial custom become written law, did the old village rituals become drama, and magical practices turn into an organized and unified religious cult, built upon cosmic myths that open up case perspectives of time, space, and power?"(page 223), a question proposed by Lewis Mumford, critic and historian. This question helps to emphasize the evolution of nations and religion. To answer his question we would have to look back on all religions and we would see the same concept. The word "myth" however argues that religion could be fake, that in it being only a myth, it may have existed or not. Religion starts off with a role model, as said before, and it grows in to the role model becoming more of a divine being.
Politics and Religion are two concepts that should remain apart. Why? Because throughout history, the dangerous mixture of "church and state" or the political realm and religious beliefs was the cause of havoc in nations before us, while our nation developed and still in some countries today do we see that Religion reigns by forth being in power in the political realm. For example, when England decided that Christianity was the way of life, that you under no exception had to become a Christian. Then you have in the 1600's the way through to the 1900's, African Americans were forced to become Christians along with being slaves. Native Americans were forced on to plantations to live, they were forced to forget their native tongue, their native lifestyle, but for most, they had to give up their way of life to become Christians, or they were going to be 'forcefully removed': put to death.
Today we face the debate on whether the Ten Commandments should be allowed to be posted in public places, political public places, like courthouses for example. In posting the Ten Commandments in a courthouse symbolizes that Church and State are Unified. It represents that God is in control. While at the same time it merely shows Ten Natural laws that we should abide by to 'be a better person'. Sadly, it must be said that it is hypocritical for someone to say that is why they want the Ten Commandments posted. If the Laws that our government has lied down for us to follow has yet to stop our people from doing wrong, then what are the mere Commandments supposedly written by God?
There is a large comparison between the Laws of God and the Laws of Man. And indeed some of the Commandments are Laws of Man, "though shalt not kill", "Though shalt not steal", "though shalt not commit adultery". The last one not so much but basically we can relate it to having sex with a minor, or something to that effect. Not only does it symbolize Church and State as a unified body, but it comes across as though they are pushing the religion on a person. Whether that is the reason behind it or not, these are the reasons people disagree, logical reasons, and more logical than being said that our Country was founded on Christianity, when it was not.
To add to these concepts, it's illogical to say that if the Ten Commandments are allowed to be posted, then so are any other Religious laws, such as: Jewish laws, Hebrew Laws, Pagan beliefs and ways of life along with Tibetan traditions or Iraqi religious laws. Because if a religion came to the United States of America and said they wanted to put their Religious laws beside the Ten Commandments, someone would be offended. There would be more murder, and religious wars would start in our home land. To top that all off, Christianity is the Hypocritical Bully of religions.
So here, will be stated that The Ten Commandments or any other Religious Sect should keep their religious ways to themselves, if all cannot be apart then just One should not have the rite. If the Ten Commandments should be posted in public, let it be posted anywhere except in government buildings, such as courthouses. We can keep the people happy if you split it down the middle. Compromising is a concept we have lost as a tradition, and for the human race to survive we as a people should resort back to it. You defile your religion when you force it on people, there is a vast difference between spreading the word, and telling someone their going to hell if they don't.
Here is where we will break from religion for a while, and walk down the path of science, the conflicting department with which walks hand in hand in the bipolar state of human existence. To bring up and answer briefly the question of 'why religion and science so strongly disagree', is this: Science goes against religion in that 'supernatural' beings did not create the world. That the world begot in a fashion through which we evolved. While religion states that God created the world in Seven days, saying that evolution is not how we became what we are. That we are born with the preset that we will face some challenges that other people may not face. "That your destiny is set for you."
Science argues that through evolution, cells, atoms, nuclei, we slowly went from being Dinosaurs to the vast quantity of what the human race consist of. Science in it's theories and laws created by some of the greatest physicists such as Newton, and Einstein. Humans have an overwhelming need to understand how things work, to help understand who we are and our place in the universe. But religion and science conflict because the two are after the same thing, but in different ways: a better understanding of where are we and who we are in the universe.
It depends solely on what kind of family you were born into and their beliefs. A Christian family or a family full of scientists, will you grow to those beliefs on whether there is a God or we evolved. It will be stated here that some Christians do follow science and just have a faith and understanding of God. It's more logical to follow science in that we evolved, and have a faith in God to fill in the blank spots in science if you must. Science has proven more who and what we are then religion. Bold I know, but true. Even science cannot explain some things, such as day one, not yet however. Religion has done so much more hiding and snooping around then science and so it is hard to grasp on to a concept that God created us in seven day when Science proves on a daily basis, further turning more away from religion.
Science looks back through technology, and has been hundreds of years. Religion is in the same context has, but what man figured it all out. There should be more to explain and there is not, there is lack there of further turning to science for the truth. Religion should be less political and less domineering, and reside in being something to have Faith in. To have faith in something is marvelous, and just. To live under something that wants to dominate a life style into becoming strict with forbidding laws is not the right way to go. Religion, Science, and Politics should remain their separate paths. To co-exist in harmony would be that they all quit forcing their beliefs on people. Science doesn't so much force their beliefs on people, rather they stick the facts out there and let people pick and choose. Sadly you run in to an extremely stupid person and you just cant help but get angry and want to force it on them, but their just to stupid so they give up. Go science. Politics and Religion however are the most guilty for trying to force their beliefs on people.
One day, we may find that science is the way it goes, religion is a faith, and politics is not so violent. But until that day comes. Believe what you want, but study, research, look at every fact, and please become a better person in doing so. In doing those simple, small tasks, you will become the first of a new breed of people. Open minded, intelligent, knowledgeable, non-forceful ,and understand without a reasonable doubt that nothing yet can be set in stone of what is true and what is false, that we are only on a journey to understand. So get out, and understand. But truly, understand.
Works Cited
"The Bedford Anthology of World Literature: The Ancient
World, Beginnings-100 C.E.". Edited by, Paul Davis, Gary Harrison, David M. Johnson, Patricia Clark Smith, John F. Crawford. New York. 2004.
|
 |
