A discussion on religion was started when some of my friends inquired
what I thought about religion and Christianity after reading a Bible quote page
from my website. The aim of this
discussion is to explore the subject of religion. I am not happy with organized religions because they tend to
fight with each other for followers and money.
Historically, many wars are started by organized religions. Dogmas do not make sense without putting
things into the social, historical, and cultural perspectives.
The Bible is a beautifully written book and I enjoy reading it. The Bible is also a foundation of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Besides the controversial (rather ridiculous) laws, the Bible also provides many good teachings and clever stories. Frankly, I am personally more interested in a broader sense of religion, rather than a narrow sense of a specific sect of religion or imposed dogma. In this case, I would much rather be spiritual than religious.
The concept of Monotheism originated from the Middle East. As the first ancient civilization, Sumer
exhibited many common theological concepts.
For example, the Epic of Gilgamesh (the oldest existing religious
book from the Sumerians), covered the great flood, and provided interesting
stories related to life, gods, and humanity.
The concept of "one God" began in Egypt. There is a theory that Egyptians have always
been somewhat monotheistic, even though many gods were there to demonstrate
theological attributes. Similarly, Hinduism
can also be considered as a magnification of the "one God" believe
system through sophisticated indigenous polytheist practices.
As late as the eighteenth dynasty, a Pharaoh imposed a revolutionary
religious reform of worshiping only one God.
Nevertheless, Egyptians went back and forth between monotheistic and
polytheistic systems. Interestingly,
the Egyptian revelation apparently also included concepts of original sin
(purification was used during mummification), future restorations of humanity,
the resurrection of the flesh at the end of time (that's why Pharaohs were
mummified), and some kind of final judgement and certain concept of trinity
(pyramids can be a metaphor for this idea).
Judaism
The Hebrews likely received the concept of "one God" while
they were in captivity in Egypt and Moses brought monotheism back with the
Hebrews to Palestine when the first "Israel" was established. Another potential theory is that Abraham
moved down to Egypt temporarily and during his stay, Abraham introduced the
concept of "one God" to Egypt before the Egyptian religious reform.
The Torah (particularly the first five books of the Old Testament
portion of the Bible) is considered the holiest scriptures of the Jewish
tradition. Moses was credited with the
establishment (rather re-establishment) of the Jewish tradition after he
rescued the Hebrews from Egypt.
Most Jews believe that Messiah can come only
at a time when the world reaches the state of refinement, which should have the
characteristics of a high level of morality and the awareness of God. Messiah is considered as an award to humanity.
Those believing in the saviour theory consider Messiah as one that can
provide physical and social delivery of prosperity. Jesus did not deliver as expected by Jews. This concept of "fulfillment" and
"good vs. evil" seems to come from the ancient Persian national
religion. Babylon conquered Judah and
enslaved a substantial number of Jews.
Most Jews eventually lived under Persian rule (after the fall of Babylon)
before the Persian emperor released them back to their homeland.
Christians were derived from a small sect of Jews. As far as I can see from the Bible, a
Christian is saved by accepting Jesus Christ as a personal saviour and asking him
to forgive one's sin. Many Christian
theologians think that this is all it takes for a person to get to heaven
because the person's name is immediately written in the "Book of
Life" which will be used at the time of the second coming of Christ and on
the big judgement day. This concept is
shown in the New Testament portion of the Bible as follows:
“"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" (ROMANS 3:23); "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Je'sus Christ our Lord" (ROMANS 6:23); "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Je'sus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." (ROMANS 10:9); "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (EPHESIANS 2:8-9)
However, most churches insist that once a person is "saved",
the person should mingle with other Christians and based on one's true
passions, the person should self-willingly involve in churches. See, this is an excellent marketing tool
because as "true Christians", nobody would deny ones'
responsibilities to involve in the churches where they found their saviour!
The Catholic Church is even more intelligent by inventing purgatory,
saying that "actions must follow confession" for one to eventually
get to heaven (through levels of purgatory) and nobody can get to heaven
without being part of the Holy Catholic Church. Of course, this was exactly what sparked the reformation and the
creation of protestant churches.
Candidly, I have difficulty accepting the idea that only Christians are
saved by God. Just think about all the
people who have lived and died before the birth of Jesus and those who have
never heard of Jesus in their life. I
don't think a kind and universal God would reveal truth to only one small sect
of the population or humanity. Many
churches are no difference from businesses, i.e. trying to recruit more
customers and as a result of the increased membership, more money, power and
nicer building.
The 10% donation originated after Jews entered Palestine. At that time, Jews lived in simple villages,
so 10% to the church (when the church was the country) was indeed not that
much. It was virtually a tax imposed by
the church government. Now that we are
all paying so much (perhaps around 50%) on taxes to the three levels of
government, it is rather ridiculous for churches to expect 10% of their
members' salary!
Moses and Jesus were descendents of Abraham. Theologically, Jews and Arabs are blood siblings. In fact, Arabs trace their origin to the
elder son of Abraham (Ishmael) and Jews trace their origin to the younger son
of Abraham (Isaac). Of course, the
worst fight, as in religion as well, always end up occurring within one's
family.
According to the Bible, God promised prosperity to both sons of Abraham
before Abraham's wife (who gave birth to the younger son, pursuant to God's
miracle) kicked the elder son and his mother (the slave girl of Abraham's wife,
who later became Abraham's concubine as a gift of Abraham's wife when the wife
discovered that she could not conceive) out to the desert.
The Koran shares many stories with the Bible (the contents can be
slightly or somewhat different), only that Koran presumes its reader to have
good understanding of these "Bible stories" and mainly used the
stories for teaching purposes, instead of covering the stories like a history
textbook (which is the case of the Bible).
Christians consider Paraclete (an entity promised by Jesus) to be the
Holy Spirit (Orthodoxies consider coming from Father only and Catholics and
Protestants consider coming from both the Father and the Son), whereas Muslims
consider Paraclete to be Muhammad. Both
Jews and Muslims do not accept the idea that Jesus could be God, noting that
the Old Testament stated, "Only YHWH is God".
Muslims consider Christians as idolaters of Mary and Jesus, therefore
the Koran emphasized that there can be only one God. “To some God spoke directly; others He raised to a lofty
status. We gave Jesus son of Mary
indisputable signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit.” (AL-BAQARAH
2:253); “No mortal whom God has given the Scriptures and whom He has endowed
with judgement and prophethood would say to men: ‘Worship me instead of God.’” (AL-‘IMRAN 3:79)
However, the Muslim tradition was very tolerant of Christians and Jews
living in Arabia because they were considered as "People of the
Book". “Believers, Jews,
Christians, and Sabaeans – whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does
what is right – shall be rewarded by their Lord; they have nothing to fear or
to regret.” (AL-BAQARAH 2:62)
Women in
Religion and Society
Virtually all current religions are somewhat against women. One interesting observation is that
historically the Muslim world was centuries ahead of China and Western Europe
on its treatment of women. Muslims can
have only four wives, but they must be treated equally and with respect by the
husband. This concept was introduced
mainly because many women became widows after their husbands died in the
war. Moreover, women can inherit
properties (50% of the portion inherited by men). The Koran says:
“Men shall have a share in what their parents and kinsmen leave; and
women shall have a share in what their parents and kinsmen leave: whether it be little or much, they shall be
legally entitled to a share” (AL-NISA’ 4:8); “A male shall inherit twice as much
as a female. If there be more than two
girls, they shall have two-thirds of the inheritance, but if there be one only,
she shall inherit the half.” (AL-NISA’ 4:11).
In China, men could have as many concubines as they wanted even 100 years
ago and women were binding their feet since childhood. Of course, women never had any right to
inherit properties during imperial times.
In Western Europe, even in Canada, the concept of women inheriting
properties exists only for about 100 years.
Women were treated as properties of men in the Law of Canada even after
the time of Confederation.
Now that we are fortunate to be more advanced in the past 100 years and
we (the Western World) are now treating the Muslim world like Muslims are
uncivilized. This is quite hypocritical
indeed. Many Christians are just being
so ridiculous and ignorant that they do not even realize that a substantial
portion of the "outdated" Muslim practices are written in the Bible,
inherited from the Jewish tradition, and as directed by the
"Christian" God. Having said
that, many of these practices and rules in the Bible are indeed outdated for
our civilization.
What kind of just society would create laws like this? "If a man find a damsel that is a
virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they
be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father
fifty shekels of sliver and she shall be his wife;" (DEUTERONOMY 22:28-29)
This is a Jewish law directly from the Bible (sanctioned by God), which
encouraged men to rape any women they like to marry by paying off the women's
fathers.
Jews punished adultery by throwing stones at the accused to their death
as directed by God and as written in the Bible. Christian Europe and Christian America had no problem practising
slavery, as slavery was somewhat sanctioned by the Bible. Remember that it was God who sanctioned
genocide when he instructed Jews to conquer Palestine after leaving Egypt and
wandering around the desert for 40 years.
This is the same kind and loving God portrayed by Christians. If God's law is universal, why should
Christians all of a sudden have problems when they see someone using
stone-throwing to punish adultery.
Perhaps because many Christians enjoy practising adultery, which was
prohibited by the Christian God and the Bible?
Or perhaps Christians find it easier to have their sin forgiven than
taking responsibilities for their own actions?
Would Buddhism and Hinduism be more responsible to God (Ultimate Reality
of Natural World) when dealing with natural law and natural justice? Religion can certainly become very dangerous
when people use God viciously.
It makes me wonder why God would create women as "second class
citizens" in the first place. Eve
was created as a companion of Adam. The
Roman Catholic Church (completely controlled by men and run as an absolute
monarchy) rejected women from becoming bishops (even priesthood is denied) or
participating in any dogmatic church activity, even today in 2005. It is ironic to see young women devoting
themselves to the Catholic Church.
Could the Pope's doctrine against contraceptives and abortions be
responsible for AIDS in Africa and the poor economic conditions in the
developing world? Perhaps, feminists
should really fight against any religion that has anything to do with the Bible
(including Jewish, Christian, and Muslim traditions). After all, why should God have a male gender anyway?
German Philosopher Immanuel Kant argued agnosticism nicely. He said that a blind girl could never
experience the beauty of a rainbow.
Conclusively, the physically constrained human beings are prohibited
from knowing for certain whether or not God exists! After all, is it possible to prove whether or not music exists
for a deaf person?
Bryan Magee, former professor of philosophy at Oxford University,
discussed the question "Can the existence of God be proved?" The answer is "No". He focused on three dimensions.
First, the teleological argument that the universe exhibits design and
purpose, therefore there must be a "God" doing the design. This argument was rejected because modern
sciences can explain apparent chaos and randomness of natural phenomena. Moreover, the sum of chaos and randomness
does not necessary has a purpose or design.
Then, there is the cosmological argument that someone or something must
create the cosmos. The big weakness is
the infinite regress generated by this argument. If the cosmos is so complex and great that it requires a creator,
then how do we explain the existence of this creator?
Finally, the ontological argument that focused on the imagination of the
greatest, most perfect being possible.
Basically, if the being with the greatest attributes does not exist, then
it is not the greatest being because a being that exists is better than one
that does not exist. As a result, we
have Jews, Christians, and Muslims all putting attributes to a God who is the
sum of all greatness and perfection. Of
course, Kant disproved this argument using his notion of
"experience".
Magee concluded that the consensus among philosophers is that God cannot
be proved, i.e. God's existence cannot be shown rationally. Similarly, the existence of God cannot be
rationally disproved.
God can be a human creation to satisfy people's needs. Absolute monarch said that his authority
came from God, so that subjects must follow the monarch's rule. An interesting notion is that God exists
only as long as his or her believers exist.
Once the last believer dies, God is dead. If God is created by humans, humans are arguably programmed
biologically or socially to recognize the existence of God.
People can be virtuous because they simply feel good about being
good. If a person has tons of money,
one is very happy donating some to the poor and having them praise the person’s
philanthropy. After all, the notions of
charity, prosperity, power, and glory are the pursuit of most people. This is ironic because no matter how much
money or glory one earned, a person must die and leave everything eventually.
The evolution of human civilization indeed shows the observation of
"better chance for survival through co-operation and being
good". Nevertheless, does it
matter if we survive in this world, if it is so temporary? As Buddhists like to put it - life is full
of suffering! Would early death be a
blessing over a long and suffering life?
Do we actually exist? The world
is unfair and full of greed and evilness, so why should one try to be fair and
good?
Historians always tried to use history to make emperors virtuous. Unfortunately, it seems like there were many
more evil rulers than virtuous rulers throughout human history. If rulers and governments can be evil, how
can justice be executed?
In the old days (at least in Confucian China), one should get married
and have kids, so that one can pass the family name and genes to the next
generation. In the modern society, many
people choose either not to get married or not to have kids. Is there any point for survival in an
ethics-less and meaningless world?
Given the world is full of unfairness and suffering, why should one try
to perpetuate the survival of humanity?
Is it completely selfish bringing kids into this problematic world? If the world is only meant to be based on
biology and survival, the world probably should not exist.
If life has no meaning and there are no consequences for one's actions
(beyond death, which every human being must experience), it is certainly better
to be evil (deceiving) because if one can get away with deception, one can live
a great life, otherwise, the worst physical punishment is death, which is
virtually nothing in a meaningless humanity.
Most people choose not to be evil, so there must be a force behind the universe.
If God is a concept that can be proved rationally, religion does not
need to exist. There would be no faith,
since God is then an undisputed fact.
Morality requires a higher power and humans are moral beings, therefore
the notion of God or ultimate reality should be there. However, human limitations certainly make it
difficult if not impossible to understand the concepts and attributes of
God. Throughout human history,
religions are used to describe and make sense of this abstract ultimate reality. I personally found that it makes much more
sense to understand religion as a whole based on human experience, instead of
devoting one's time into a particular religion, especially when organized
religions tend to repel each other.
An ultimate reality, i.e. God, should be Christian, Jewish, Muslim,
Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Taoist, Confucian….
As human beings, we are very limited by our life and abilities, so the
concept of eternal life can be more or less a myth. People are rational beings, so I trust that we exist for a
reason, i.e. not because of random occurrence.
This reason is not necessarily being properly preached by any particular
religion.
Copyright © 2005 by Albert Chan. All rights reserved.