Jon Wong on Religion
All religion, regardless of whether it be Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc, centers around the idea of a God. This being purports to be the all-knowing, all-seeing entity that created everything, watches over everything it has created, and decides on what happens when living creatures expire. In other words, the existence of God explains two fundamental questions: how did we get here, and what happens after we leave. Therefore, to truly examine religion, we have to examine the fundamentals of there being a God. If the existence of God is granted, all else follows.
Grant made an excellent point about a few of the fundamental flaws of Christianity, ie. the thing regarding his father and how even if he is a good person in his lifetime, not believing in Jesus would send him straight to hell, and the thing about being judged solely on intentions. All religions have different ideas on what one "should or should not" do. It's important not to assume that God necessarily fits one description just because one religion says so, and this is a pitfall that many people fall into when they talk about religion. Grant and David, I notice that your discussions on religion tend to be centered around Christianity. Grant, I know has recognized this. For example, David you mentioned something about "aren't we created in his image?" That in and of itself is specific to Christianity as not all religions state that man is created in God's own image. Again, just because a church has been accused of corruption and perversion does not taint the religion itself. It's not Christianity that is corrupt and perverted, it's the people who purport to represent Christianity that are corrupt and perverted when in all likelihood, they aren't actually representatives of the fundamental principles of the religion at all. It's like if someone says he represents a perfect vegitarian and then you catch him eating meat. That doesn't say anything about the principle of vegitarianism. It just means that this person is a hypocrite.
I asked Hisham Ali once about what he thought about the people who did evil deeds "in the name of Islam" and his response was, "those people aren't really Islamic. They just use the religion to try to justify wrong intentions." And that's exactly what I mean when I say you absolutely cannot judge a religion based on those who represent it.
This is why I am going to avoid talking about specific religions and focus primarily on the fundamental principle that unites all religions; and that is the belief of a higher power that explains how we got here and what happens when we die. Throw in a few miracles and unexplained phenomenons during the course of life and is it really that hard to understand why people choose to believe in a religion?
There is no tangible proof of God. There never was and probably never will be. The existence of God depends purely on faith. The concept of God was in all probability created and accepted by those who sought to explain the unexplainable. Humans, by their very nature, fear nothing more than the unexplained. This is why many children (many adults too in all probability) are afraid of the dark: because when darkness falls, our sight, which is one of our 5 senses with which we use to judge everything, becomes ineffective. I am going to define "unknown" as "something that cannot be picked up by the 5 senses" because the only things we are capable of understanding to any degree are those that effect our 5 senses.
But I digress. Humanity's fear of the unexplained. Of course, the two biggest unexplained things as far as we are concerned is how we got here, and what happens when we die. Everything that happens between the time of our actual creation and our eventual death we can pretty much explain well enough so that people don't have to reach outside the branches of our 5 senses to find an explanation. "Science" takes care of nearly everything between birth and death.
Of the two questions, what happens when we die seems to be the focal point of most religions. Ironically, there is a stronger argument for the existence of God when it comes to explaning how we got here. In fact, the only concrete evidence I have heard that argued in favor of God's existence is how it all started. Science has stated that nothing is spontaneous. Every single event/phenomenon occurs as a result of something else that happened before it. The "Big Bang" theory states that the universe was created during an initial spontaneous explosion, before which there was absolutely nothing. This is why the strongest argument in favor of God's existence lies here. Something must have sparked the initial "movement" from which all other things were set into motion. This is also known as a watch maker theory. If there exists a watch, there must also exist a watch maker. If there is a universe, there must also exist a universe maker.
People tend not to care about where they come from as much as where they are going. This is where the second question of what happens when we die is supposedly answered. Most people have something to live for, or at least feel like they do. People who feel that they have absolutely nothing to live for tend not to fear death or care about what happens when they die. However, most people have something to live for. I'm sure the idea of there not being an afterlife (ie you simply cease to exist) would scare many people very badly. In a way, it's a form of survival. Because what happens after death is unknown, people are naturally afraid of it. The existence of a God (and thus an afterlife) firstly helps calm us down (cause there's no escaping death), and also provides an incentive for people to be "good" ie, you're not finished when you die so don't screw yourself over now cause it'll come back to haunt you. Like it said, it relies purely on faith.
Religion was not created to be a tool to keep people in line. It may have evolved to become this way, but the fundamental principle behind the creation of religions is to explain the unexplained.
So is it logical to belive in God? Well, if you only accept things based on proof of their existence with relation to your five sense, the answer is no. BUT, keep in mind that however illogical it may seem, believing in God (whether or not he exists), helps to keep the human race somewhat more balanced. It's like how I always said that you often realize that many things are possible so long as you don't know that they're impossible. It's the same thing with God. To people who believe, he exists as long as they don't know he doesn't. They don't care that they can't prove that he exists so long as you can't prove that he doesn't.
Grant made an excellent point about a few of the fundamental flaws of Christianity, ie. the thing regarding his father and how even if he is a good person in his lifetime, not believing in Jesus would send him straight to hell, and the thing about being judged solely on intentions. All religions have different ideas on what one "should or should not" do. It's important not to assume that God necessarily fits one description just because one religion says so, and this is a pitfall that many people fall into when they talk about religion. Grant and David, I notice that your discussions on religion tend to be centered around Christianity. Grant, I know has recognized this. For example, David you mentioned something about "aren't we created in his image?" That in and of itself is specific to Christianity as not all religions state that man is created in God's own image. Again, just because a church has been accused of corruption and perversion does not taint the religion itself. It's not Christianity that is corrupt and perverted, it's the people who purport to represent Christianity that are corrupt and perverted when in all likelihood, they aren't actually representatives of the fundamental principles of the religion at all. It's like if someone says he represents a perfect vegitarian and then you catch him eating meat. That doesn't say anything about the principle of vegitarianism. It just means that this person is a hypocrite.
I asked Hisham Ali once about what he thought about the people who did evil deeds "in the name of Islam" and his response was, "those people aren't really Islamic. They just use the religion to try to justify wrong intentions." And that's exactly what I mean when I say you absolutely cannot judge a religion based on those who represent it.
This is why I am going to avoid talking about specific religions and focus primarily on the fundamental principle that unites all religions; and that is the belief of a higher power that explains how we got here and what happens when we die. Throw in a few miracles and unexplained phenomenons during the course of life and is it really that hard to understand why people choose to believe in a religion?
There is no tangible proof of God. There never was and probably never will be. The existence of God depends purely on faith. The concept of God was in all probability created and accepted by those who sought to explain the unexplainable. Humans, by their very nature, fear nothing more than the unexplained. This is why many children (many adults too in all probability) are afraid of the dark: because when darkness falls, our sight, which is one of our 5 senses with which we use to judge everything, becomes ineffective. I am going to define "unknown" as "something that cannot be picked up by the 5 senses" because the only things we are capable of understanding to any degree are those that effect our 5 senses.
But I digress. Humanity's fear of the unexplained. Of course, the two biggest unexplained things as far as we are concerned is how we got here, and what happens when we die. Everything that happens between the time of our actual creation and our eventual death we can pretty much explain well enough so that people don't have to reach outside the branches of our 5 senses to find an explanation. "Science" takes care of nearly everything between birth and death.
Of the two questions, what happens when we die seems to be the focal point of most religions. Ironically, there is a stronger argument for the existence of God when it comes to explaning how we got here. In fact, the only concrete evidence I have heard that argued in favor of God's existence is how it all started. Science has stated that nothing is spontaneous. Every single event/phenomenon occurs as a result of something else that happened before it. The "Big Bang" theory states that the universe was created during an initial spontaneous explosion, before which there was absolutely nothing. This is why the strongest argument in favor of God's existence lies here. Something must have sparked the initial "movement" from which all other things were set into motion. This is also known as a watch maker theory. If there exists a watch, there must also exist a watch maker. If there is a universe, there must also exist a universe maker.
People tend not to care about where they come from as much as where they are going. This is where the second question of what happens when we die is supposedly answered. Most people have something to live for, or at least feel like they do. People who feel that they have absolutely nothing to live for tend not to fear death or care about what happens when they die. However, most people have something to live for. I'm sure the idea of there not being an afterlife (ie you simply cease to exist) would scare many people very badly. In a way, it's a form of survival. Because what happens after death is unknown, people are naturally afraid of it. The existence of a God (and thus an afterlife) firstly helps calm us down (cause there's no escaping death), and also provides an incentive for people to be "good" ie, you're not finished when you die so don't screw yourself over now cause it'll come back to haunt you. Like it said, it relies purely on faith.
Religion was not created to be a tool to keep people in line. It may have evolved to become this way, but the fundamental principle behind the creation of religions is to explain the unexplained.
So is it logical to belive in God? Well, if you only accept things based on proof of their existence with relation to your five sense, the answer is no. BUT, keep in mind that however illogical it may seem, believing in God (whether or not he exists), helps to keep the human race somewhat more balanced. It's like how I always said that you often realize that many things are possible so long as you don't know that they're impossible. It's the same thing with God. To people who believe, he exists as long as they don't know he doesn't. They don't care that they can't prove that he exists so long as you can't prove that he doesn't.
posted by JW at 8:52 PM
1 Comments:
like the other posts, very very well written, and point made.
one comment though. you forgot about buddhism, taoism, and all the who-knows-what-elses that rose from the Eastern culture (Jon! you, being Asian! and living in multicultural Canada!!), as well as Greek mythology, and the spirits of the natives. they're very different from the religions with an omnipotent God. any analyses on those?
Post a Comment
<< Home