Getting Religion

wiki byzantine

I don't understand religion.

Sometimes when I think about the effects religion has upon people I become frightened.

I see people transformed, as they describe their particular God's intentions for makind,  into those automatons that I've read participated in the French revolution.  Friends and neighbors, baker turned guillotine-operator, eyes mad with blood lust.

Perhaps I am seeing something that really is not there?  I think not.

Beliefs hold strong power over us all.  Cracking through our belief system seems impossible on both sides - whether trying to convince someone, or when confronted with evidence  that we have been so so wrong about something we'd thought we really knew.

Religious beliefs held by many confuse me.  How can a person claim to live by a law given to them by their own God:  "Thou shalt not kill" and then  add "but....it's ok under these circumstances" to the end of God's sentence?

How can a person not see that there may be things that they cannot know - like other people's Gods?  When people tell me things on God's behalf I wonder why God wouldn't just tell me himself - right?  How can people expect me to believe in their God if their God is telling them to kill people?  My God tells me NOT to kill people - it's one of his ten commandments.  Doesn't that make my God better?

We can go on forever about these belief issues - which is why we are doing everyone a service by adhering to a legal system of agreed-upon laws which we all agree to live by.  Finding a way to keep individual religions out of it is almost impossible since it seems that our laws have religious foundations somewhere along the timeline of the past.

How can a person tell me God told them something I need to know - but they can't get God to say the same thing to me out loud so I can hear it too.  Usually the next thing they tell me is I have to pony up some cash so they can do more good.  Why does their God need my money?  Yes a bit of sarcasm.

I do not wish to poke fun at religious beliefs because I have too much respect for my religious friends and also know that maybe they know something I don't know - maybe they do have a special insight in these religious matters that I do not have.  In the meantime - while we philosophize over that - we have to get on with living our lives as I have been told.

That means mutual respect - then we get into definitions of "good" religions and "bad" religions.  These are also fascinating discussions which can lead to historical "proof" of said religious beliefs backing up this or that God under discussion.  Henry Ford said that "history is bunk" which makes me wonder if that statement applies to historical proof of religious beliefs.

Yesterday I took a look at a few websites discussing acupuncture.  One site was Wikipedia and then some independent ones which gave a much more balanced and respectful viewpoint of this part of Chinese medicine.  Acupuncture may be sneered at in Western culture because it is not based on science - but does that necessarily mean that it won't work?  I thought the Hippocratic Oath was at the basis of medical morality "First do no harm" - perhaps that means acupuncture should be tried if there is a possibility that it "works" to treat maladies and causes no harm.  Perhaps acupuncture really works and is a powerful tool that we simply cannot explain using science as the medium of explanation - I don't know.  Are there parallels with religion I wonder?

In the world of peace I envision people do not have wars over religion.  But is there a possibility that this is an impossible dream if religion is at the base of our common morals.  If we no longer rely on laws - like the Constitution and Bill of Rights which seem written in an effort to minimize our tendency to fall back on religious-based decision making - then the most popular religions will be at odds with each other on certain major issues.  Religions seem to justify violent action when certain sins are committed - and voila - we have mortal combat and war.  I know the Pope has recently come out and said that "killing in the name of God is blasphemy"- but I also know that Christians in general have not heard that word because that is not what they tell me they believe.

A respect for ALL human life, at a minimum, must be our common value:  Whether a value of religion A or religion B does not matter.  What matters is finding those commonalities upon which we can all agree - then work out from there.

The alternative is to continue the tendency - whether fomented by media masters or not, toward a religious war - a war that may have to burn itself out.  A war that once started will escape the control of its masters (slaves?) leading to nothing but waste.  What are your religious leaders doing to prevent this?  Are they reminding their flocks of their duty to uphold what used to be American values like "Thou shalt not torture people,"  "Thou shalt not lie countries into wars,"  etc...??


Where were all these pious religious leaders, call them saints if you wish, on television when it was time to speak out against torture, trampling of rights, spreading of fear and terror for cash prizes - where were the churches etc...???  They may have forgotten their duty to remind their parishioners
of their moral duties and to hold their public servants accountable for high crimes - but I'll bet they never forgot to pass around the collection basket!

Perhaps the fight we are really involved in here in the "States and by extension, the rest of the world, is a battle for our common values.  Common values at a very local level extending up to common values at a national level - then international.  Laws binding all parties are enacted every day - do these laws represent our values?  It seems more often than not we find ourselves confronted with laws that do not serve the common good.  Sometimes what is considered "common" changes - like the mix of religious belief systems - then the trouble begins it seems.  Doesn't it make sense to always remember that religious systems are indeed belief-based - but can only serve as the foundations for why we enact certain laws - but should never be the legal system themselves?

Or are we forever trapped within the limits of our abilities as human beings to grasp what common set of values can bring us together to create the best world possible for all of us?



  1. Human Concord Requires Holy Spirit--Always Arising In Cyclic Fashion From Previous Strife, Misery

    I will attempt to approach this essay of urs by taking certain statements made and then replying to them; I'll do this in the order written so as to preserve, much as possible, the overall logic of the essay.

    (a) U say u "don't understand religion." But note religion is just a symbolical-type, aestheticalist approach/rendition, substitute for more formal philosophy--for remember MOST people can't handle straight-out, strict logical/scientific -type formulations--they need stuff put to them in way of a story--like kids (or children). Note Christ referred to the mass of people as "flock" of sheep, Christ the "good Shepherd."

    Thus Christ NEVER spoke like college professor--he told the people, who were surely mostly illiterate, stories, called "parables," mostly referencing the stories people were already familiar w. fm Old Test.

    Thus we come to the sublime, divine Christian "religion" w. embedded philosophy, Christ = TRUTH, the only way to Godly happiness (Gosp. JOHN 14:6), this against Jew (Pharisaic) lies (JOHN 8:44).

    Pt. then is "truth" necessitates under-lying, implicit objective reality (Aristotle) serving as criterion/basis thereto--against subjectivism, basis of satanism and lies.

    (b) Thus, as reality is objective, it's determined (according to absolute cause-effect) and CYCLIC--every successful political system first arises, but then eventually corrupts, like Roman empire, for example, often due to over-population, the people, too many of them, becoming corrupt and hubristic, adopting subjectivism, especially in guise of "good-evil," the inferior (corrupted) masses insisting upon socialism, etc., as part of "good" pretensions.

    In conclusion, I endorse ur final sentence and paragraph regarding "limits of our abilities...." Eventually every and any system corrupts and collapses in CYCLIC fashion (as "Decline of the West," by Oswald Spengler). Un-fortunately, the "decline" stage is marked by ascendancy of hubris and lies, truth struggling--it's a time of gross and dire struggle, strife, and warfare.

    U've got to begin to understanding human beings as "sinners," given to hubris, irrationality, and thus subjectivism, their civilization corrupting and collapsing, warfare being INEVITABLE--in the inexorable CYCLIC course of events. And it's impossible for this basic human condition to changing--they wouldn't be human (sinners) otherwise. Only thing to be done then is to minimize the warfare much as possible--as always--such is the "sinful" human condition, mediated by the divine wisdom, reason being integral part of Holy Spirit, along w. HONESTY.

    1. Hi Apsterian,

      I may be repeating myself but I don't think God wants me to pray for him to tie my shoe, I think he wants me to tie my own shoe.

      Same goes for considering what can be done to contribute to a constructive debate toward change that is good for everybody - less emphasis on war and killing each other as much as possible.

      I agree that many people are inherently "evil" "bad" etc... and that God would also allow us to defend ourselves against these monsters in addition to praying for him to fix it. I have no history on which to base this.

      Yes I agree that the public must be "guided" along for many reasons - but they should never be cut out entirely as they are being now.

      Yes I am returning from a blogging vacay - I had to think things over for a while.



    2. Judaization Of Christianity Integral Part Of Cultural Decline

      I didn't say or intend to indicate people were "bad" or "evil"--and it's no diff. for anyone--all humans are "sinners"--creatures of will and self-interest, but not always rationalist as possible, so then too subject to HUBRIS.

      And it's CYCLIC phenomenon regarding human culture which eventually becomes to heavy w. over-populated people of hubris, against HONESTY, quite diff. fm the sort responsible for the rise of the culture, who were, at least originally, so given and dedicated to honesty.

      Note also, this corrupting trend of hubris and subjectivism affects the "religion" too--esp. in way of the present Judaized Christianity in at least 2 or 3 chief ways: (a) present "Judeo-Christianity" (JC--see Whtt.org and TruthTellers.org for expo on JCs) pushing Pharisaism, esp. in form of fallacious "good-evil."

      (b) Judaized Christianity also adopts the Judaic "faith" of beleeeeeeeeevin' instead of the proper and original LOYALTY. This diff., Judaized sort of "faith" is important as original Christianity is founded on worship of TRUTH above all, not needing beleeeeeeeeeeeevin'. It's only the lies of Judaism which requires the "beleeeeeeevin'.

      (c) And of course, the basic, original, and real Christian reality is objective, basis of thematic TRUTH to be worshipped, such truth (= Christ) only way to Godly happiness according to Gosp. JOHN 14:6--UN-LIKE the Judaic version which makes reality subjective in accord w. an hubristic, perfectly "free" human will which couldn't exist in an objective reality in accord w. absolute determinism and thorough-going cause-effect.

      So u see, JR, how the religious over-turning reflects and complements the overall cultural decline and corruption, the present corrupt "Judeo-Christianity" having effectively replaced the original thing.

      Thus mysticism replaces reason; subjectivism replaces objectivity--as Jews and criminals come to dominate the real Christians and Christianity. For the real Christianity is sublimely rational--which too many people forget.

  2. Replies
    1. Helpful information provided I’m very delighted to see this post..many thanks for presenting all of us great information.Great walk-through. I appreciate this kind of write-up.
      hazel games
      kissing games

  3. Thanks Mel,

    it's one of my favorite subjects



Only by exercising YOUR freedom of speech shall you keep it. Comment now - I can handle it....

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.