| 
WARNING!!! THIS IS LONG!!!
Like I said before, Aura, I’m definitely not scholarly on the subject of evolution. So I’m sorry if I don’t know what I’m talking about and add opinions here and there from my uneducated mind. For me, taking the route of going to school to gain a better understanding of the topic is not an option. But, I would like to make an effort in understanding the theory of evolution and study it in my own time.
Would you happen to know of any books that would give me an oversight of the history and science of evolution? I’ve always wanted to pick up Darwin’s books, but I would rather get a basic understanding of how evolution is considered to work today. I would also like to read about the discoveries and how the theory has changed since Darwin’s time. If you know of any that would be great.
Whereas you have a basic understanding or formal education in the theory of evolution, my own personal study for the past few years now has been in religions, especially the Christian faith, as I am a Christian. I hope that you can hold to the advice you gave me, because as you know, being ignorant of any subject makes it hard to have a conversation on it. Opinions aside, (since we are all going to have opinions, one way or another) we must hold ourselves in a neutral state before drawing conclusions, that is, if we have not looked at all the facts. This is something I need to do more.
Aura wrote:
quote:
“I wouldn’t be so quick to defend any religion (Christianity included) by “logic,” and “truth”. At some point those things become inapplicable because unless someone has met God, and that can be objectively confirmed, your logic and truth will eventually have to give way to faith (the opposite of logic) in order to keep believing what you do”
First off, we must all agree – and I mean everyone – that no one can know anything about God unless He has revealed Himself to us. Like Aura said above, “unless someone has met God, and that can be objectively confirmed, your logic and truth will eventually have to give way to faith.”
It is a misconception that “logic” and “truth” become inapplicable when finding the absolute truth in any one religion. It is logical to believe that if one knows God, he/she must have met God, or God must have revealed Himself to him/her. If someone claims that they have met or talked to God, they must be tested. This is a hard thing to do – to test someone on how truthful they are – but here in America, as well as in many parts of the rest of the world, this happens every day in civil court. The many different religions can be tested in the same way to find their reliability, trustworthiness, and truthfulness. The fact is though, not many people will take the time to search them thoroughly.
Another misconception is that “faith” is the opposite of logic, which is untrue. The act of “faith” is more than merely the act of “belief.” The act of faith is based on its object of faith. And to a rational person, that object must be trustworthy and true. Although it is typical for someone to believe in something supernatural blindly, this is only an exception. Having faith and trusting in something blindly gives you no reason to believe in that object at all, because you will have no reason or any facts as to whether it is true or not.
Aura stated:
quote:
“ ”I just know it’s the truth” or “I feel that it is true” are more faith statements that truth statements.”
These statements are related to a person’s faith, but to be more accurate, they are not “faith statements.” They are only statements based off of emotions and feelings. The people who make these kinds of statements do not know why they’re faith is true and cannot give examples to corroborate these statements. Plainly stated, this is just believing in something blindly. I don’t think it is wrong to believe in something blindly; it takes a great deal of trust to put faith in something you know nothing about. But, it would be dangerous to do so if what you are believing is untrue. What if there were harsh consequences to believing in something that was not true?
Aura stated:
quote:
“In my opinion, the teachings of Buddhism – an eastern religion – is more logical and practical than Judaism, Christianity, and Islam…whose teachings, by the way, originate from the same texts – the Hebrew Scriptures. Common sense, eh? Those three religions are the source of some of history’s biggest massacres (i.e. the Crusades) and political manipulation (i.e. the Papacy).”
Not to be a “know-it-all”, but I must point out that there are some mistakes in your last paragraph. Not all the teachings of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam originate from the Hebrew texts. Judaism uses what you are calling the “Hebrew Scriptures.” This is the Old Testament (as Christians call it). It contains the five books of Moses, books of Jewish history, Psalms and Proverbs, and the many books of the Prophets. Christians have the same books in their Bibles, plus the New Testament – which includes the four Gospels of Christ, Acts, letters from the apostles, and the book of Revelation - which was originally written in Greek. The people of Islam claim that their holy book, the Qur’an is copied from an original in Arabic, which is in Heaven. Although Judaism and Christianity share the Old Testament, Islam shares nothing. Islam claims that the Bible, is filled with contradictions and lies and do not specifically hold to it as God-inspired scripture, though they do share many beliefs about Abraham and the other prophets that come from the Old Testament. They do not hold that Christ was the chosen Messiah.
There is a view in the world that the beliefs of Christianity cannot be true because of all the horrible things that have been done in Christ’s name. The ongoing opinion is: “how can you believe in something that is supposedly good, that claims to be the truth, but has done so many horrible things?” This is just an excuse. Many people, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and atheists do horrible things on a daily basis. This has gone on throughout human history no matter what faith anyone took. Everyone has a right to choose what they want to do. Some choose to fight wars for non-noble causes, some don’t. People don’t want to realize that this has always been humanity at its finest.
Let’s say a vacuum cleaner salesman comes to your door and tells you that the product he is selling is reliable and is the best on the market. You trust him and decide to buy one based on the facts he gave you, but when you decide to use it, it breaks down. This man told you this vacuum cleaner was reliable, but it’s not. Does that make all vacuum salesmen liars? Does that make them all untrustworthy? No! The only fact is that there was one person out of the many representatives of vacuum sales that wasn’t doing what he should have been doing. Not all representatives of a specific organization are going to do what’s right, all the time. You all know this. So it’s not fair to say that all representatives of Christ are going to do what’s right all the time. Even Christ knows this. That’s why we’re imperfect as human beings. Christ predicted that there would be wars and all sorts of bad things carried out in his name.
What I meant by "common sense" is, those in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have the same kind of common sense logic that the majority of people have -- like those in the U.S. When it comes to viewing the world, "what you see is what you get." And we know that for there to be a God, and for us to have any kind of knowledge or information about Him, we must have seen, and talked to Him. Isn't that "common sense"? (what I mean by having "common sense" is: having knowledge of the "real" world)
The Crusades and the Papacy are the result of Catholic Christianity, which doesn’t hold to the earliest traditional form of Christianity. Realize that the Catholic Church is always having power struggles and problems. But then again, what imperfect human organization doesn’t have problems?
Why do you believe that Buddhism is more logical and practical?
Aura stated:
quote:
“I really don’t believe that you need to follow a religion in order to have meaning or purpose in life. Again, no disrespect, but in my opinion the draw of religion is a predetermined “life guideline,” “something to believe in,” and for some – mediums through which people with the same beliefs can socialize and/or make plans to evangelize.”
Anyone can have “meaning” or “purpose” in life apart from organized religion when it is a fact that the typical person believes that “life is what you make of it.” And it is true for the person who believes that statement. They can do everything they want to in life and do as they wish and feel fulfilled. But then they die. Life stops and we know of no human who has been reincarnated or is immortal. The only one who boasts such a claim is Christ, who Christianity claims to be God’s Son, who defeated death by rising from the grave. Christianity doesn’t claim to be only “life’s guideline”, or just “something to believe in.” Christ claims that you will die if you do not trust in God. “Trusting in God”, means believing in the one God sent.
“…he who rejects me rejects the one who sent me.” Luke 10:16
It doesn’t matter to God what you personally believe in. God only cares that you believe the truth about Him. God claims that if you deny the truth about Him, He will deny that He ever knew you. People are often scared away by words like these; they think this view of God is either wrong, or cruel. But what people don’t think about is whether or not it is true, because they’ve already made up their minds that they don’t like it. Can you honestly say that you’ve looked at all the facts and made the wisest decision? Maybe if you tried to look down on the world through God’s eyes (that is, if you think there might be a God) you might be able to understand, why people “make plans to evangelize.” To us, it’s not about numbers, it’s about souls.
The Bible, the Qur’an, and any of the mainstream or underground religions, cults, or New Age beliefs can be tested to see what might be true or not. Like Evolution, this is the science of probability.
Aura asked:
quote:
"Um, what eastern religion is that?"
Mainly Hinduism, of which Buddhism is a derivative. Hinduism compares to what I said about eastern religions in my above post. To pantheists like those in the Hindu faith, All is devine, or all is God. Typically Eastern religions emphasize that everything in the world is temporary, changing, ephemeral and unreal and that our perceptions of the world are most often misleading and illusory. The physical universe is not seen as a rational, ordered universe revealing God's glory (see Psalms 19:1-4), but as a hinderance to experiencing "Ultimate Reality."
In the East, Ultimate Reality is thought of as attainable within each individual by realizing intuitively that the "self" is Divine, or at least part of the Divine. God is, for the most part, seen as an impersonal unifying force who takes no personal interest in individuals. The idea of a creator having authority over the universe and making universal moral demands is, by and large, rejected. To the pantheist, God did not create the world; God is the world, along with everything in it.
Hinduism is not really one religion, but many religions crammed into one. To be a good Hindu, one can believe in one god, many gods, or no god at all! This is because for Hindus, contradictory ideas are not a problem. All reality, contradictory or not, is seen as "one".
Buddhism is pretty much a derivative of Hinduism, but it denies some of it's core beliefs. I can go into this later if you like. But, mainly with my example, what I was trying to state is that since Eastern religions see the world and everything within it as illusory, and since contradicting beliefs don't really make any difference, it is hard for them to make any standards or state what their foundational beliefs are. If all the world is illusory (even your thoughts and everything you see) there is no way to make a truth claim since it is an illusion itself. And this belief cannot be completely held onto because it is impossible since logic cannot exist when all is illusory.
"All statements are false. The last statement is false.--One of these statements is true."
|
