Pages

Total Pageviews

Popular Posts

Popular Posts

Tuesday 15 February 2011

Musings on Religious Relevance

<><><> <><><> <><><>
This is a conversation between Alhassan and moi in which we grapple the relevance of Religions.
Alhassan Kuyateh
Wadi,you made some points to counteract the Holy Quran and the Holy Bible. Now make  this clear,how creation comes about ,you dont believe there is a suprem God, you dont believe those prophets do exist ,this holy books came through revelat...ions,do u believe that christ and Mohammed were prophets. The examples you made is conflicting,God did not say we should kill one another,neirher harm the harmless, It you and me that causeing all this problems on earth, God is merciful and peaceful. I strongly believe that, you miss understood those books,by that i mean you analise those books in your wone ways. Seat back and make further research and rethink and spread your though and mind.'i believe that will help you to a better judgement on this books and how they came about .  thank you

Wadi'TheZima'
I am far from convinced about this, having read the Bible cover to cover(thrice), Koran(twice) I find them riddled with contradictions, Sexism, Racism, Bigotry and fantastically grotesque in their taste for slaughter and genocide. ...I have a problem with the notion that to have your child deliberately slaughtered in the most gruesome manner is in some way an indication of love. Such a proposition  borders on the insane and then, to ask us to ritualistically drink his blood and eat his flesh(communion) is too close to cannibalism for my liking. I also take umbrage at the tale of Noah and the flood. Why would a loving and supposedly merciful God  see fit to wipe out ALL LIFE because SOME humans displeased him/her. What did the, butterfly, snail, rabbit, chimp, ants, lions etc etc do to warrant such merciless and indiscriminate slaughter. This Biblical and Koranic Mega-Genocide is in my view the ultimate violation of 'JUSTICE'. Collective punishment is by definition Unjust. Imagine if you will, that you upset me and as retribution I wipe out all your family, your City and your Nation is this 'JUST'? Is this a guideline for life? I think NOT! As If this were not enough we are invited to accept that a 600year old man was able to traverse the globe and collect over a Billion species of life forms and pack them into a boat. Just pause for a moment and think about this, do you have any idea how vast such a boat would have to be  and then you would have to treble or quadruple the size to carry the food required ... I don't wish to labour the point but clearly this story is a complete nonsense and is not capable of surviving close scrutiny.
We would have to be insane or deluded to have our lives guided by such books.
My advice to all is to  actually Read the Bible and Koran cover to cover, and then reflect on whether these religious tracts can be anything other than an invite to madness.
Alhassan I am going to address the issues you raised in chronological order. Let me open this discussion by declaring my position, I am an 'Assertive and Unapologetic Evolutionist' I contend that the Universe in general and our species in particular are the product of Billions of years of evolution. Indeed we humans are relatively recent  arrivals on the existential and historical stage. Clearly such a position is at odds with the  notion that God created the world in six days six thousand years ago. There is absolutely no demonstrable evidence to support the view that the earth is only six thousand years old or that we humans were created in six days. in fact all the evidence runs counter to the 'creationist claim' It needs to be said that the judaeo-Christian Creation Myth is one of many many creation myths. Had you been born in Japan, China, India etc you would have had a completely different creation myth. It is no exaggeration to say that the 'Creation myth' you espouse is the direct result of Geo-political  conquest and cultural colonisation by judaeo-Christian imperial powers. Let me just give you two quotes that go to the heart of this question. Seneca(The Younger) a Roman Philosopher had this to say 'Religion is regarded by the common people as true,by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful', Napoleon  was even more direct he said 'Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet'.Given the foregoing it should come as no surprise to hear that I do NOT believe in a supreme God and No, i do not think that the so called 'Holly books' came through revelations(these books play host to too many contradictions inconsistency and are just plain wrong and factually inaccurate to be any thing other than Human constructs limited by the state of knowledge obtaining at the time), and the key point here is not whether JC, Mohammad, Buddha etc were prophets, the point I am en devouring to make is that religions are no longer fit for purpose and have outlived their relevance.Lest we forget, We humans existed before these religions, and we have lived through the period of religious dominance and are now rapidly evolving beyond the imposed fracture of religions. We are entering the Age of Humanity, shifting from a belief based existence to a knowledge based one. As a species we are discovering our 'Authentic Voice' as we decolonise our minds and assert our Human Dignity and integrity. Egypt, Tunisia etc are the most eloquent manifestations of this new Human Consciousness which transcends the social, political and religious fractures which to date has served to defined our reality. The Revolution in and of Humanity's Consciousness now enables us to speak of creating a 'Humane, Human Centred, and Human sensitive' civilisation. You suggest that I may be mistaken in pointing out the bloodthirsty nature of these religious tracts, may I in turn suggest you re-read the bible. You will come across many examples where God is supposed to have ordered the Jews to commit genocide, to kill men women, children and all Livestock etc if you read these books objectively , you can come to no other conclusion than that these books are simply tyranny codified, and serve to dumb us down.Merciful God you say, may I recommend you revisit your bible and read the following passages  Joshua 6:21, Deuteronomy 5, 20, Leviticus 20, Numbers 15,  31:18, Exodus 20, 34: 13-17 etc Finally if you wish I can send a more comprehensive list of contradictions inconsistencies, inaccuracies  in both the Bible and the Koran. As always Wadi'The Zima'

4 comments:

  1. Big brother; you know I love you with all my heart, but you are a fathead. Of course the bible is full of contradictions; of course the creationists are wrong; of course the story of Noah is ridiculous; of course any genocide is reprehensible; and so on. But none of this obviates the existence of God (nor do they prove the existence of a Supreme Being.) Remember, I love you.
    W5

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dri,
    At last,we engage. I love your 'Chutzpah' it is almost breath taking.;-)
    I hope that in the course of this discourse, I will disabuse you of this curious notion, that to discern that the 'Emperor is naked' is an indication that one is a 'fathead'....So to work.
    ''Of course the bible is full of contradictions; of course the creationist are wrong.....But none of this obviates the existence of God.'' Oh really, doesn't it? I take it you subscribe to the view, that your version of an invisible/Imaginary friend, is, Omnipotent, omniscient, infallible, Just, loving and Merciful. Furthermore, I suspect that you share the hypothesis that the Bible and its contents are a direct revelation from God. I am sure you can instantly detect the inherent problem with this...I will return to this anon.
    At this stage, I simply want to pose these questions.Lets for argument sake take as a given, that your infallible,Just, Loving, merciful, all powerful and all Knowing God exists. What I want to know, is, what convoluted reasoning and intellectual gymnastics are you prepared to deploy in responding to the following?
    'Is your God willing to prevent Evil but not able?
    Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able but not willing?
    Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing?
    Then whence cometh Evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing?
    Then why call him God?'
    Ruminate and masticate on that a while.
    Turning now to your assertion that 'none of this obviates the existence of God'. As no doubt you would expect, I disagree profoundly with your assertion. I mean, how do you reconcile the notion of an infallible God, who created and configured every atom in the Universe, who knows everything that has happened, everything that is happening, and of course, every thing that will happen, how do you reconcile this, with the central tenet of your religion, 'The Crucifixion'? Was it to rectify a mistake?
    I suppose, when that little boy pointed out that the Emperor was 'naked', I am sure those with faith, claimed that this did not in any way obviate the existence of the emperors superb outfit.;-)
    You Know I Love you and I always will.
    As Always W3 Wadi'The Zima'

    ReplyDelete
  3. Very good. I will first respond to the last paragraph - the little boy's statement did obviate the existence of the emperor's superb outfit, but it did not obviate the existence of the emperor - the fact that people (including the emperor) had deluded themselves does not mean that the emperor was not the emperor. I know you understand this, but I will risk belaboring it; We create the circumstances of our understanding of God, that does not mean that we get it right and it does not mean that we define God (except to ourselves.) My knowing you and believing that you, my brother, can walk on water and do no wrong neither obligates you to walk on water and do no wrong, nor does it mean that if you do not you are no longer my beloved brother.
    I will talk to the rest of your delightful post anon - I must go and worship that difficult and challenging fellow.
    W5

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dri
    I have perused your 18Feb. comment and it seems to me that you are been somewhat disingenuous.
    As I am sure you are aware, at issue in this tale is not the existence or otherwise of the emperor, but the claimed existence of the emperor's new and 'superb outfit'. As no doubt you can recall, while The Royal Court and various sycophants swooned and unleashed a veritable panegyric in praise of the cut and style of the emperor's new jib, it took a child to point out that despite the mass delusion, and the ever more extravagant claims, the simple fact was that the emperor was naked and just as the child's observation was sufficient to obviate the existence of the emperor's 'superb outfit', so the laying bare of the contradictions,absurdities, compound fallacies etc which underpin the God Delusion serves to 'Obviate' the very existence of God.
    As ought to be clear now, the point I was endeavouring to make is this, the delusional notion of an omnipotent, omniscient, infallible, merciful and loving creator/God is of the same magnitude of absurdity as the emperor's invisible/non-existent 'outfit'.
    You say that 'We create the circumstances of our understanding of God', have you forgotten that your invisible friend who created and configured every atom in the universe is supposed to be omnipotent, omniscient and infallible, as such, it is your invisible friend who creates the circumstance of your understanding.
    I am also of the view that your provocative analogy casting me in this risible role is fatally flawed. Firstly your brother is Not a God, as is evidenced by the fact that 'I EXIST', I am tangible, palpable, objectively verifiable and if you are mistaken in your beliefs about me I can and will correct you, the same cannot be said about your God.
    It is true that I am not obliged to walk on water simply because you believe me capable of doing so, however, this line of reasoning only holds for as long as I do not lay claim to having created and configured the universe, or to been Omnipotent and omniscient, as your God claims, the moment these concepts are introduced into the equation and attributed to an entity you no longer have the luxury of not 'getting it right' since this would suggest that God was fallible and incapable of defining him/herself in an accurate and correct manner...this does not bode well for omnipotence, omniscience and infallibility ;-)
    My beloved brother, it is time we moved on from the organised superstition that are these Religions, they are left overs from another age, we are at long last entering the 'Age of Humanity'. We are at long last finding our authentic voice, freed from the insult to our intelligence that are these Religions.
    The Humanist Revolution is of course the Solution!
    As Always W3 wadi'The Zima'

    PS I am looking forward with something akin to an intellectual thrill for your considered and comprenhensive response to my original Post & comment W3

    ReplyDelete