Sunday, January 22, 2006
Evolving Blush
Where does theology belong? Its scary to admit it, but its there: you don't know some of the answers. I want to spend time finding the answers but knowing that they possibly don't exist puts lifes purpose in another realm of understanding. Today I told my parents that I don't know what I believe, and that in a very real nature, that unknown is alot further from their ideas than it used to be. But what I didn't tell them is that the looking is slow, the finding is even slower, and I fear I am going to be in this stage forever.
I turn to the holy books. I want a moral truth, but I want it to be unbiased, unbigoted, unchanged by human hands. Intro to New Testament taught me I want what we all want but doesn't exist. We need to put a mask on God to make him look more like man so we can understand. I did find somethings though. Sparkles of gold among a ramble of jewels, and a touch of riches among the rest of common. And so it was written
"A prophet is honored everywhere except in his hometown and with his own people and in his own home"
"You cleverly ignore the commands of God so you can follow your own teachings"
"There is nothing people put ino their bodies that makes them unclean. People are made unclean by the things that come out of them"
"It is worth nothing for them to have the whole world if they lose their souls"
"Whoever wants to be the most important must be last of all and servant of all"
"Salt is good, but if the salt loses its salty taste, you cannot make it salty again. So, be full of salt, and have peace with each other"
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God"
And that is only after reading half of Mark, a book written 30 years after the crucifiction by a man who never even met Jesus. Does he have authority? Maybe. Does he sound wise? Yea. Does he say alot of truth that agrees with my deepest opinions? Indeed. But is his writting the word of God......I'm not sure yet
Myu parents are coming into town to watch my dance performance and i am very excited for someone from home to learn about my life here. Wish me luck ¶ 4:31 PM
I turn to the holy books. I want a moral truth, but I want it to be unbiased, unbigoted, unchanged by human hands. Intro to New Testament taught me I want what we all want but doesn't exist. We need to put a mask on God to make him look more like man so we can understand. I did find somethings though. Sparkles of gold among a ramble of jewels, and a touch of riches among the rest of common. And so it was written
"A prophet is honored everywhere except in his hometown and with his own people and in his own home"
"You cleverly ignore the commands of God so you can follow your own teachings"
"There is nothing people put ino their bodies that makes them unclean. People are made unclean by the things that come out of them"
"It is worth nothing for them to have the whole world if they lose their souls"
"Whoever wants to be the most important must be last of all and servant of all"
"Salt is good, but if the salt loses its salty taste, you cannot make it salty again. So, be full of salt, and have peace with each other"
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God"
And that is only after reading half of Mark, a book written 30 years after the crucifiction by a man who never even met Jesus. Does he have authority? Maybe. Does he sound wise? Yea. Does he say alot of truth that agrees with my deepest opinions? Indeed. But is his writting the word of God......I'm not sure yet
Myu parents are coming into town to watch my dance performance and i am very excited for someone from home to learn about my life here. Wish me luck ¶ 4:31 PM
Comments:
<< Home
Do we really know who wrote "Mark" and when? That is a serious question, by the way, and if you are looking for a holy answer that is unbiased, either close your eyes, or get out alot of different books.
The truth (or reasonable equivalent thereof), that most historians have agreed upon, is that the book of Mark was either originally written anonymously or the author was lost. It, almost certainly, was not written by one of the disciples, but perhaps by a friend of one. It was one of the first known gospels of Jesus' life, probably written about 20 to 30 years after his death. Although very popular (it's my personal favorite gospel), it was initially rejected by the church (as were scores of others; Jesus was a popular guy). Approximately 200 years later, the church accepted it and unanimously and conveniently attributed it to Mark, the son of Paul, mentioned in the book of Peter:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Peter%205:13&version=31;
To prevent a shower of "HAHA! So the Bible is a worthless crock of shit!", all I want to add is this: Don't get too caught up in labels. Concerning Kara's gems, does it really matter if someone named Mark wrote them or even if Jesus actually said them; if you find the words spirtually enlightening and true, why not take them with you? In the quest for unbiased truth, it is simply foolish to reject something just because it is Christianity, or just because it is not.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Peter%205:13&version=31;
To prevent a shower of "HAHA! So the Bible is a worthless crock of shit!", all I want to add is this: Don't get too caught up in labels. Concerning Kara's gems, does it really matter if someone named Mark wrote them or even if Jesus actually said them; if you find the words spirtually enlightening and true, why not take them with you? In the quest for unbiased truth, it is simply foolish to reject something just because it is Christianity, or just because it is not.
Would I ever reject it just because it was Christian? ...ok, maybe, but I really like alot of the stuff in the Bible, including passages in this post that I love and yet never remember reading. And we've all discussed this - Like my fondness with Buddhism (that you would scoff at simply because it's Buddhism and people like it. It's simply foolish to reject something just because it is Buddhist, as you'd say) It matters not whether Buddha existed, or who wrote any piece of literature devoted to it. Although modern day Buddhism is as rediculous as all organized religions, the core of it stands firm, and provides what it needs without support or hostorical foundation. Same goes for Christianity. Take what you get, yah?
I think you and I are in agreement, for the most part anyway. I just want to make one thing clear, I do not scoff at Buddhism. I think Buddhism is terrific. I have respect for all the major religions (if not for their churches), especially Buddhism, although I will openly admit that, for better or worse, I am far more familiar with Christianity than any others, although this is something I have resolved to work on.
What I scoff at is the American counterculture's wholehearted embrace of everything Buddhist and wholehearted disgust toward everything Christian. I find it ignorant and prejudiced. I don't like being treated like I'm some kind of idiot for not yet coming around the beliefs everybody else has. Loving Buddhism and hating Christianity is hardly more than fad following these days.
In a general sense, anyways. I don't think you're ignorant, Ryan, I hope you know that. For the time being, in terms of knowledge of the respective religions, I simply think you err on the side of Buddhism and I err on the side of Christianity, and that's that.
What I scoff at is the American counterculture's wholehearted embrace of everything Buddhist and wholehearted disgust toward everything Christian. I find it ignorant and prejudiced. I don't like being treated like I'm some kind of idiot for not yet coming around the beliefs everybody else has. Loving Buddhism and hating Christianity is hardly more than fad following these days.
In a general sense, anyways. I don't think you're ignorant, Ryan, I hope you know that. For the time being, in terms of knowledge of the respective religions, I simply think you err on the side of Buddhism and I err on the side of Christianity, and that's that.
Wow, I had no idea such conversation was going on right underneath my very own nose! I appreciate the dialog. Interestingly enough Lenny and Ryan, today's entire lecture was on "who was the author of the book of mark, when did he or she live, and what culture was it written for". Although tedious, I feel much more confident knowing the intent and authorship of the book and deriving meaning and authority from that than just taking it in as most of us do good quotes. You read them and think "those were well put words". I like to know who said them and why and how that effects what it meant to them. My mind can only think in its directions so other ones would be nice to know.
I concur and agree with both of you and would one day soon like to discuss the ideas of subjective relativism, more specifically subjective fallacy. Indeed...I miss you guys (with more mushy intensions towards Ryan)
I concur and agree with both of you and would one day soon like to discuss the ideas of subjective relativism, more specifically subjective fallacy. Indeed...I miss you guys (with more mushy intensions towards Ryan)
subjective - Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world
relativism - A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them
fallacy - A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference
I recalled these from memory and most certainly did not get help from www.dictionary.com.
If you'll excuse my tangent: My favorite case of subjective relativism was a serial murder case in the early 90's. A man shot and killed 20+ people on seperate occasions in order to send them instantly to heaven, and relieve them from the misery of their lives. He realized he would eventually be caught and executed, but saw himself as a martyr in this respect, almost Jesus-like, sacrificing himself to save others. And I cannot help but wonder... if he truly believed he was helping these people by killing them, in what way are his actions evil?
relativism - A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them
fallacy - A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference
I recalled these from memory and most certainly did not get help from www.dictionary.com.
If you'll excuse my tangent: My favorite case of subjective relativism was a serial murder case in the early 90's. A man shot and killed 20+ people on seperate occasions in order to send them instantly to heaven, and relieve them from the misery of their lives. He realized he would eventually be caught and executed, but saw himself as a martyr in this respect, almost Jesus-like, sacrificing himself to save others. And I cannot help but wonder... if he truly believed he was helping these people by killing them, in what way are his actions evil?
Yah, Lenny, I was kidding about the not understanding the big words thingy, and as I was reading your definitions, I was saying in my head "He just uses any fucking excuse to use that little dictionary.com window on his taskbar."
And that tangent is a subject that would go on and on, until, as I think we both know, it would end up with, "ahh, but what is...?" and "but is ___ real?" and finally, in the end, we would find ourselves gracefully unaware of our location: right where we began, with the illusion that we had gained intelligence in said cycle.
And that tangent is a subject that would go on and on, until, as I think we both know, it would end up with, "ahh, but what is...?" and "but is ___ real?" and finally, in the end, we would find ourselves gracefully unaware of our location: right where we began, with the illusion that we had gained intelligence in said cycle.
Ha, I was mostly refering to the idea developed by New Age guru Shirley MacLaine. She sounds alot like what i hear you boys claim alot, that "life doesn't happen to us., We make it happen. Reality isn't separate from us. We are creating our reality every moment of the day" Basically, believe it and it will come true because we make reality.
Parts of it are appealing but after wrestling with it, I can't outrule the reality of contradictiong beliefs that everyone holds. All realities imagines can't bve present at once, hence we would have to select cosmic times to make cerrtain realities and blah te dah. How I take it is perhaps we have great control, perhaps even close to complete control of how we affect OUR reality, not reality as a whole. That it, perception is enough to change not just how we see but what we see.
But believe what we believe, think what we think, affect the world how we do, the general truth of reality is constant, thus the definition of truth. I don't hold the truth, it just is (or so is what thousands of years of logic has concluded)
Wow, totally rambling. But the subject goes on and on. later
Parts of it are appealing but after wrestling with it, I can't outrule the reality of contradictiong beliefs that everyone holds. All realities imagines can't bve present at once, hence we would have to select cosmic times to make cerrtain realities and blah te dah. How I take it is perhaps we have great control, perhaps even close to complete control of how we affect OUR reality, not reality as a whole. That it, perception is enough to change not just how we see but what we see.
But believe what we believe, think what we think, affect the world how we do, the general truth of reality is constant, thus the definition of truth. I don't hold the truth, it just is (or so is what thousands of years of logic has concluded)
Wow, totally rambling. But the subject goes on and on. later
You do, factually, make your own reality. All of reality is made up of everyone's reality, hence solving your problem: That is why there are complications, contradictions, violence, peace, love and hate. Obviously you can't really physically shape the world (or can you, if you really believed you could? Quantum Physics says YES!) but you do make it. You think positive, the world gets better. The opposite is true. You express something, someone collaborates with it, suddenly speech exists. There are millions of examples, and an infinite amount of ways to prove it. Even more important, your own understanding of it (and with more understanding comes more participation) makes your possibilites even more endless, and your capacity to love and experience the world even greater. To quote Tyler Durden: "You choose your own level of involvement!"
The problem with most people's conception is that they believe there is just one reality. I am not talking about alternate dimensions or phase shifts or anything that out there. I instead think there are as many realities as there are people, each one hand-crafted by them, the grand total of everything they've ever seen, done, experienced.
Of course, all these other realities are inaccessable to us except our own, although we may overlap in places. So, the answer, obviously, is no we do not have the power to create everyone's reality, but we do have power over our own. You may say that this is subjective fallacy, but here's the catch:
If there is a great truth of reality, it is unaccessabile to us. Also note, that if there were an untouchable, solid reality beneath our own, just because two people (or the whole world) believes something would not make it true (Because you wouldn't be able to alter this fundamental truth). So why point fingers at whose philosophy is fallacy, when there's an equal chance you're just as wrong?
I don't know if I made that point well, but I have to run, so that's the best I can do right now.
Of course, all these other realities are inaccessable to us except our own, although we may overlap in places. So, the answer, obviously, is no we do not have the power to create everyone's reality, but we do have power over our own. You may say that this is subjective fallacy, but here's the catch:
If there is a great truth of reality, it is unaccessabile to us. Also note, that if there were an untouchable, solid reality beneath our own, just because two people (or the whole world) believes something would not make it true (Because you wouldn't be able to alter this fundamental truth). So why point fingers at whose philosophy is fallacy, when there's an equal chance you're just as wrong?
I don't know if I made that point well, but I have to run, so that's the best I can do right now.
This is leading to the grand "what is truth" question and I don't really want to go there. To an extent I agree Lenny and I tried to offer that up in my logic class and it didn't fly. The only reason was is because as we contrinue to create our own reality and "truth" everyday, we interact in such a way where the understading of fundamental concepts that make up reality, truths, are vital to communication. Then there becomes ideas that are inarguable, thus becoming the closest thing we have to truth as you defined it.
However, if there is no one reality, one base, that exists outside the realm of human conciousness or control, what do we argue to and from? How can we reason to a higher level of understanding if not even basics can be agreed apon? It seems like you are almost betting on that somehow, magically, cosmically, all of our realities developed in a way that made it so each has identical elements of belief to every other reality.We all have some things is our creative existences that matches everyone elses realities.
If there was no one existence outside of us, how could there be anything connecting us? I've never really thought this out but I am pushing through it right now.
Post a Comment
However, if there is no one reality, one base, that exists outside the realm of human conciousness or control, what do we argue to and from? How can we reason to a higher level of understanding if not even basics can be agreed apon? It seems like you are almost betting on that somehow, magically, cosmically, all of our realities developed in a way that made it so each has identical elements of belief to every other reality.We all have some things is our creative existences that matches everyone elses realities.
If there was no one existence outside of us, how could there be anything connecting us? I've never really thought this out but I am pushing through it right now.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
