Chat Box- For discussions/debates only

Announcements

22 December 2009 @ 18:30 hours

Dear readers,

Sorry for the retarded rate of blogging. WK and DM are and will be riduculously busy until further notice. We will try to post once in a while, so stay tuned.

DM will try to monitor/manage the chatroll whenever possible. Meanwhile, Ivan and Evone have been given administrative rights to ban unsavory individuals from the chatroll.

Chatbox rules have been shortened.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Why De Maitre doesn’t have a Religion

A few people have asked me what do I have against I have religion. I don't have an issue with religion per se; I just have issues with believers.

To me religion is merely a social construct. Being an avid historian, I don’t believe in abstract concepts of divinity or miracles. As I mentioned before, 2000 years ago, a man who claimed to speak with God and spread warnings of doom was a prophet, but today, a man who does the same is said to suffer from schizophrenia or paranoid delusions. And our ancestors have a way of over-glorifying hear-say and great-deeds. For example, the ancient Greeks worshipped dinosaur bones as the bones of long dead heroes like Achilles, Hector and Hercules because they believed that heroes were larger than life.

Religion and the concept of hell were designed to inspire fear in evil-doers and motivate them into doing charitable, gracious and kind deeds in their lifetime. It aims to build a Utopia on Earth; unfortunately, people have a way of manipulating religion to suit themselves. Example would be the blatant use of fictional “divine origins” as a means to a king’s legitimate rule or one’s ability to perform extraordinary feats. E.g. The Holy Roman Emperor of Medieval Europe, The Divine Emperor of China and The demi-God Hercules (son of Zeus). Another example would be the blatant corruption of the Catholic faith by the Catholic Church, the primary example would be the “Sale of Indulgences”, where the church literally created certificates indicating that the holder would be sin-free in the eyes of the Church and therefore God. Somehow, God became secondary in comparison to the Church.

As you can see, the original tenants of religious belief have been lost over time due to flawed human interpretation. There is nothing wrong with religion it’s just how people interpreted it that becomes an issue! It is the people’s belief that gets corrupted with disillusions that we have created over time to comfort and cheat ourselves that made me write off religion for good. I don’t have a religion, but I think God (if any is around) is a little more discerning and forgiving than that. Let me inject some reason in “If I have done no evil, but just because I’m not a Christian (or Muslim for that matter), why do I deserve to go to hell?”

I question this more avidly in view that a believer is promised a place in heaven just because he kills a non-believer. This is what I define as my issue against the believers rather than the religion. This concept of Crusade/Jihad has been wrongly intepreted by believers. I believe the original intentions were to protect the faith, not to wipe out other faiths in a bloody and forceful manner. I'm sure God (if any) had a better sense of ethics than we do.

In today’s context, on occasions, belief has been reduced to the point of ridicule to me. That’s why I use the term Modern Christianity and Modern Buddhism. I will be using these 2 examples for my writing here.

We have anthropological studies, archaeology and written records deciphered by historians to tell us what the world was like in the past. Yet, I have met many Christians who still have to insist that the Bible is an infallible source of historical information. As a diehard historian, I’m really tempted to take off my slipper and slap them to death for their blind faith in a book that was NOT written by Christ or God himself, but from a cesspit of authors handpicked and compiled by the council of Nicea. I’m using the word cesspit because there are thousands of religious literature out there written by thousands of authors hundreds of years after the death of Christ. The creators of the bible merely picked out what suited their ideals and rejected unacceptable bits. E.g. The Bible mentioned that Adam and Eve had sons and daughters, but no one knows who Cain (their son) married. Ever wondered why? Draw up a family tree and you’ll realize that the only possibility would be that he either married his sister or his niece. That would be incest wouldn’t it? Naturally, the Church wouldn’t have that, so it was conveniently excluded.

When I ask many Christians or Catholics this question, their answer is always this mysterious “only God knows”. To me, God (if there’s one) gave us a brain; I think he meant us to use it with a little more discretion and common sense. Sometimes, people have really weird beliefs that leave me flabbergasted.
EXODUS 20:4-6 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.”

Tell me then, how do you classify a cross? Some have said that it is not a likeness of God, so the second commandment has not been violated. The original cross was depicted with the body of Christ on it. And since Christ is the son of God, he is an extension of God. So we’re back to square one. Some might argue that it is from the first testament and not very valid, all I’ll say is “it’s the same God we are talking about isn’t it?”

Christians aside, let me move on and attack Modern Buddhism. Ideally, Buddhist monks should shun the materialistic world, look at the Buddhism monks in Singapore, some drive around in a Benz and live in a condominium. Temples are becoming grand buildings designed by architects. The “life of self-denial and spiritual-enlightenment”, my ass. I'm not saying all Buddhists are like this, but it’s a growing trend in today's context. I think the term "embracing modernity" is a terrible excuse for the abandonment of old value of "humility".

Buddha preached about letting go of one’s material demands in pursuit of spiritual enlightenment. As I mentioned in my previous post, if Buddha still had a body to flip and jump in, he would be positively bouncing in indignation in his grave and the degeneration of his teachings. There are thousands of Aunties and Uncles flocking to his temples to pray for luck at 4D and TOTO. Buddha’s teachings were never about him turning into a religious icon. It was the work of his disciples. I think even the preservation of his bodily remains as relics would have made him scream in frustration, if he weren’t beyond the demands of humanly emotions and not that at peace.

If he were still alive, he would be puking blood at the hierarchical system practiced by monasteries. It was NOT created by Buddha. He didn’t even mention anything about an exclusive retreat for monks/nuns. Buddha believed that all men were equal and rejected the hierarchical system based on birth right or hierarchy. Social hierachies within temples are the unforunate by-products of monasticism. I’m certain that he would not approve of the structural system of novices, junior monks, senior monks, abbots, etc. because it would only result in internal conflict of power and control due to ambitions of certain individuals. The inventions of status and rank would also result in the death of humility. How many people have heard of an abbot doing his own laundry and helping to sweep up the temple courtyard?

Buddhist monks charge you for conducting funeral rites instead of the time honored way of giving them a token of appreciation. Today, even if the token of appreciation method is used, the quality of the funeral rite depends on your generosity. The poorer you are, the more short-cuts and mistakes there will be. So much so for reaping karma and detaching oneself from the material world. Thankfully, there are still true Buddhist monks around who genuinely believe in the concept of Dharma.

Back to the topic of Christianity, many of the Christians today are too fanatical in my opinion. Thanks to Saint Augustine (may he rot in hell), they have lost their respect for the religion's of other people. They are trying too hard to convert people to their “true” faith. Peer pressure, grand churches and gifted orators as pastors are used to convert lost souls to their faith. They are so successful that many of the Christians that I have spoken to don't seem to know what their religion is about. All they can describe to me is this warm abstract fuzzy feeling of love and forgiveness that they feel in church. To many of the born-again-evangelicals, questioning one’s faith is completely out of the question.

So to me, religion has been reduced to a shadow of its glorious past and many of its believers are following in the words of their ancestors rather than the word of God (if any).

0 Comments: