Otherwise they are hypocrites.

Religion may be an inevitable response to life for people with empathy, but it is not the first response. Babies are born with only the wonder of existence. Existence is a miracle that simply cannot be explained. We might track down the cosmic rays back to the initial Big Bang, and we can detect out of this Universe interference coming from the Multiverse from which our Universe exploded, but how can we understand the void of that Multiverse or its lack of beginning?

Religion is how people derive meaning and purpose for their existence, and yet religions try to explain other-worldly existence as though it were superior to what we have already. Since there is the fear of dying to support such interest in otherworldly dimensions, I can see the pressure to prove such escapist thinking. But when such thinking is pushed onto me for the sake of bolstering those who insist on it, I have to wonder, "What about my life now?"

And it's all fine and good for those who want to see this worldly life as a veil of tears before an everlasting bliss, but it's hard for me to imagine what that bliss is all about when it has nothing to do with the life I have now.

Oh, sure! There are people who insist that if I am not threatened with eternal punishment if I don't believe a certain set of dogma, I won't know right from wrong. I question how such subjective analysis of my morals have to do with my prospects after death. If I have no other motive for being quote quote good unless I have Divine intervention telling me exactly what I should do or think, what is the point of personal ethics?

How can I be sure that what I am told even by those who quote Bible verses to support their claims of what the Divine expects of me is true? I can't. I must think it through for myself. It's either that or the freewill that is supposed to be the foundation of punishing me in the after-death or the Judgement Day or the Second Coming is a fraud.

If these doom-sayers are  really correct, they should rely on their Divine Revelation to let my punishment occur without inflicting it themselves. Otherwise they are hypocrites.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Public Cooperation Is Not One Church of Thought.

There are fundamentalists who claim they are the only Christians and that the Constitution mandate against the establishment of a church only bars the government from controlling their churches. They insist that the government is obligated to abide by the church law of their own sect whichever one it is. Actually, the ban against an established church has precedent in the intertwining of church and state in the history of Europe during the middle ages. Every facet of life was controlled either by the church or the state, and one enforced the authority of the other. There was no room for independent thought. So when pagan knowledge was brought back from the Middle East by the Crusaders, there was a Renaissance of thinking and culture that allowed people to question everything about life. The king's religion was continued through the Protestant Revolution, but the Enlightenment that came with the Renaissance still separated peoples' religious thought from their secular though...
Read more

The Divine used as an excuse.

I find the Divine to be a poor excuse for demanding what anyone should agree to. If you have to force your beliefs on someone else, how do you know they really believe what you say? In ancient times, it was enough for the tyrant to declare how the Divine favored his (or her) regime. It really didn't matter to the poor guy at the bottom of the ladder what the monarch said. Life was not any better for believing it. It was only blasphemy against the tyrant that got anyone into trouble since the tyrant was always the Son of the Divine. It is not only in North Korea that the tyrant was considered God. Even the Roman Emperors were considered Gods which is the reason for the Greek word "blasphemy" was used in the Christian Gospel for the Sanhedrin deciding that Jesus committed blasphemy. They weren't saying that he declared himself their God. They were saying that he had declared himself a God equal to the Roman Emperor. The Western term God is derived from...
Read more

The blood sport.

Despite what Divine principles people claim to adhere to, it is a common characteristic of human nature to try to make oneself more important by demoting someone else. I suppose this is a natural phenomenon exhibited in nature with the pecking order. There are many excuses for declaring someone else as undeserving of natural rights. It's a bit of a simplification to say that these excuses involve biases concerning biology, religion, society, and economics. It's all been used. Whether it is gossip, heckling, or lying, it is a blood sport.
Read more